On 3/15/12 5:59 AM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 15Mar2012 12:22, Ben Finney<ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
| Roy Smith<r...@panix.com> writes:
|> I'll admit I hadn't considered that, but I don't see it as a major
|> problem. The type intuition could be designed to only work for types
|> other than NoneType.
|
| −1, then. It's growing too many special cases, and is no longer simple
| to describe, so that indicates it's probably a bad idea.
If `type` is not supplied and `default` is present and not None, `type`
shall be the type of `default`.
That seems straightforward to me. It's a single sentence, easy to read
and understand, and potentially saves a lot of code verbiage (gratuitous
type= prarameters). I say "gratuitous" because unless `default` is a
sentinel for "no option supplied", the `type` should always match
type(default). Or am I wrong about that?
Yes. Not all type(default) types can be called with a string to produce a valid
value. Note that "type=" is really a misnomer. argparse doesn't really want a
type object there; it wants a converter function that takes a string to an object.
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
