There is an undocumented value for add_argument's nargs parameter, REMAINDER, which can be used to consume all the remaining arguments. This is commonly useful for command line utilities that dispatch to other command line utilities.

Though undocumented, it has been used successfully by at least a few different people:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5826881/how-to-use-argparse-to-collect-arguments-for-a-separate-command-line-without

http://code.google.com/p/argparse/issues/detail?id=52

And I just received an email from yet another user who used it successfully.

So I think it's time to graduate this from a hidden feature to a real documented one.

New changeset 35665f6f3674 by Sandro Tosi in branch '2.7':
Issue #13605: add documentation for nargs=argparse.REMAINDER
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/35665f6f3674

New changeset 6f3d55f5a31e by Sandro Tosi in branch '3.2':
Issue #13605: add documentation for nargs=argparse.REMAINDER
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/6f3d55f5a31e

New changeset 6b4cec0719a3 by Sandro Tosi in branch 'default':
Issue #13605: merge with 3.2
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/6b4cec0719a3

New changeset 1b481e76cd16 by Sandro Tosi in branch '2.7':
Issue #13605: more meaningful example + fixes
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1b481e76cd16

New changeset d6e53d1f46eb by Sandro Tosi in branch '3.2':
Issue #13605: more meaningful example + fixes
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/d6e53d1f46eb

New changeset 4c3271527794 by Sandro Tosi in branch 'default':
Issue #13605: merge with 3.2
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/4c3271527794

It would be best if the 3.x docs did not use a print statement <wink>.  The code block should also be preceded by ::.

New changeset 996efb0425c5 by Sandro Tosi in branch '3.2':
Issue #13605: use print() in argparse nargs example
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/996efb0425c5

New changeset c3daa6a834c6 by Sandro Tosi in branch 'default':
Issue #13605: merge with 3.2
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/c3daa6a834c6

I have added the missing “::” before code blocks (one was added by the patch you committed, others were already here).

I’m not entirely sure they are needed (Python code blocks seem to be autodetected and show up colorized too), but I did it for consistency (and to make my editor detect them).

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 01:52, Éric Araujo <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> I’m not entirely sure they are needed (Python code blocks seem to be autodetected and show up colorized too), but I did it for consistency (and to make my editor detect them).

Yeah, I refrained to add them since the code blocks were already
correctly identified; but consistency is Good :)

Blocks not introduced by "::" are *NOT* code blocks.

If they happen to begin with ">>> ", they are recognized as doctest blocks and colorized as doctests.

Doctest blocks shouldn't be indented. (The indent is a blockquote in this case.)

(this is only concerning the latest commit)

Not sure if I should open a new issue, but why is there a print function at all, given that:

>>> print(parser.parse_args('--foo B cmd --arg1 XX ZZ'.split()))
Namespace(args=['--arg1', 'XX', 'ZZ'], command='cmd', foo='B')

>>> parser.parse_args('--foo B cmd --arg1 XX ZZ'.split())
Namespace(args=['--arg1', 'XX', 'ZZ'], command='cmd', foo='B')

> Blocks not introduced by "::" are *NOT* code blocks.
> If they happen to begin with ">>> ", they are recognized as doctest blocks
> and colorized as doctests.

Ah, that’s it!  Thanks.  So we have two valid ways of marking up doctest-like blocks, “::” ° indent and implicit markup, right?

Yes, that's correct.