name for a mutually inclusive relationship

[2QdxY4RzWzUUiLuE at potatochowder.com]

On 2021-02-24 at 08:12:58 -0800,
Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:

> I'm looking for a name for a group of options that, when one is specified, all of them must be specified.
> 
> For contrast,
> 
> - radio buttons: a group of options where only one can be specified (mutually exclusive)
> - check boxes:   a group of options that are independent of each other (any number of
>                  them may be specified)
> 
> - ???: a group of options where, if one is specified, all must be specified (mutually
>        inclusive)

I've run across this before, and almost always end up incorporating one
option or the other.  For example, consider a program's output.  By
default, it goes to stdout, but the program also supports plain output,
logging, and syslog.  So instead of mutually inclusive (for lack of a
better phrase right now) options:

  --output-disposition [logging|syslog|flatfile]
  --output-options [depends on --output-disposition]

do this:

  --output-to-log logging-options
  --output-to-syslog syslog-options
  --output-to-plain-file plain-file-options

aka three mutually *exclusive* options.

> So far, I have come up with:
> 
> - the Three Musketeers
> - clique
> - club
> - best friends
> - tight knit
> - group
> 
> Is there a name out there already to describe that concept?

Codependent?
Circularly dependent?
Entangled?