New submission from Krzysztof Szawala kszaw...@slb.com:
Currently optparse library supports the following option definitions:
-e value,
-e=value,
-e:value,
-evalue.
Having said that let's consider the following option definition:
-e string_value.
Based on the above syntax the following
New submission from Krzysztof Szawala kszaw...@slb.com:
range() method fails with the following error message:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
OverflowError: range() result has too many items
when passing a valid integer value of 99.
This value
Krzysztof Szawala kszaw...@slb.com added the comment:
As I mentionetd, the problem occurs with Python 2.5 (I won't be
switching to Python 3). The only perspective for me to upgrade is Python
2.6, but as I can see the problem applies to 2.6 as well.
___
Python
New submission from Krzysztof Szawala kszaw...@slb.com:
I am using optparse for command-line parameters parsing. To follow
common naming convention I defined -d (minus followed by a single
character option) and --debug (double minus followed by a word).
It looks like optparse doesn't complain
New submission from Krzysztof Szawala kszaw...@slb.com:
I am using optparse for command-line parameters parsing. To follow
common naming convention I defined -d (minus followed by a single
character option) and --debug (double minus followed by a word).
It looks like optparse doesn't complain
New submission from Krzysztof Szawala kszaw...@slb.com:
I am using optparse for command-line parameters parsing. To follow
common naming convention I defined -d (minus followed by a single
character option) and --debug (double minus followed by a word).
It looks like optparse doesn't complain
