paul j3 <ajipa...@gmail.com> added the comment:
Your patch is incomplete, without documentation or tests. Your example is incomplete. That is _CustomAction? What namespace does your patch produce. It's been a while since I worked on the intermixed patch, but as I recall the OP was happy with the fix. Also I don't recall any talk about 'matching "optionals" with "positionals" with they relate to. Was that part of the discussion? On Stackoverflow I have seen questions about pairing arguments, and answered some. I don't recall the best answers. The tough version is when some of the grouped inputs may be missing In your example I'd suggest making '--tracks' a nargs=2 and 'append' option. 'choices' would have to be replaced with a either a custom 'type', a custom Action, or post-parsing testing. I haven't had time yet to test your patch. One question I frequently ask posters who want to parse complex inputs is: 'how are going to explain this to your users?' 'What kind of usage and help do you want see?' ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue42973> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
