On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 6:03 AM, Jon Ribbens
<jon+python-...@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 09:38:20AM +0100, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 06:59:45AM +0300, Yuvgoog Greenle wrote:
>> > -1 for deprecating getopt. getopt is super-simple and especially useful for
>> > c programmers learning python.
>> >
>> > +1 for argparse.+1 for eventual deprecation of optparse - optparse and
>> > argparse have a very similar syntax and having both is just
>> > confusing. tsboapooowtdi
>>
>> +1 on all of this :-)
>>
>> It would be a shame to see getopt go but optparse -> argparse seems
>> logical.
>
> +1 from me too - keep getopt, deprecate optparse.
Ok, sounds like there are a number of supporters for keeping getopt
around and just deprecating optparse. For those who'd like to keep
getopt around, I have a few questions:
* Would you be opposed to a note in the getopt documentation
suggesting argparse as an alternative?
* Would you like argparse to grow an add_getopt_arguments method (as
in my other post)?
* If argparse grew an add_getopt_arguments, would you still want to
keep getopt around? And if so, why?
Steve
--
Where did you get that preposterous hypothesis?
Did Steve tell you that?
--- The Hiphopopotamus
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
