All this talk of a replacement for ConfigParser is all well and good (and I agree that a more pythonic interface would be nice)... but. We're under 2 weeks from beta1, and I can't see this new module being designed, implemented, and committed before then. Remember, once b1 is out, we're stuck with the API that we have come up with. I'd much rather see one or more packages developed alongside Python - we can then take the best of them (or maybe a merger of the best ideas for them) for 2.5. Which leaves David's original question about the two patches. While CP isn't perfect, and it would be nice to replace it, for 2.4, I don't think these patches make things any worse, and they add useful functionality (back, in one case) so I'm inclined towards accepting them. Anthony -- Anthony Baxter <anthony at interlink.com.au> It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4