[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Glenn Linderman added the comment: Raymond Hettinger added the comment: >> Sounds like another wet blanket argpment > Please watch your tone. It borders on being abusive. I considered that as a canonical description of the type of negativity presented by your comment. It was not intended

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: > Sounds like another wet blanket argpment Please watch your tone. It borders on being abusive. It is entirely appropriate to set limits on the scope of what a module is trying to achieve. It is appropriate to consider module learnability. It is appro

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Glenn Linderman added the comment: Raymond said: ISTM the scope of argparse was never intended to capture all possible patterns for command line argument parsing. Instead, it aimed at to address the common cases. I say: Sounds like another wet blanket argpment. Refer to the section "Why are

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Glenn Linderman added the comment: So the missing signature is why I didn't understand, probably. At least, it seems reasonable to blame that :) You didn't include [version] in the signature, but that isn't your fault: it isn't in the original and should be (see action "version"). So key i

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: > capture mutual relationship between command line arguments for more > advanced parsers, where order of command line arguments is meaningful I don't think this is a pattern we should encourage. It doesn't seem to arise often and it makes the API much mor

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Tadek Kijkowski added the comment: > I'm a little confused by the mention of the "key" keyword argument. I suspect > that is an internal concept to argparse, possibly passed that way to internal > methods, but on the add_argument interface, it doesn't exist... instead there > is "name or fla

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Glenn Linderman added the comment: I'm a little confused by the mention of the "key" keyword argument. I suspect that is an internal concept to argparse, possibly passed that way to internal methods, but on the add_argument interface, it doesn't exist... instead there is "name or flags" posi

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Change by Tadek Kijkowski : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +23181 stage: -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/24357 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

Change by Tadek Kijkowski : -- nosy: +paul.j3, r.david.murray, rhettinger, v+python ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mail

[issue43046] argparse: capturing actions

New submission from Tadek Kijkowski : This is spinoff from issue42973. The purpose of this issue is to provide set of additional action classes for argparse, that could capture mutual relationship between command line arguments for more advanced parsers, where order of command line arguments