On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:28:39 am Steven Bethard wrote: > 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? +1 > * Would you like argparse to grow an add_getopt_arguments method (as > in my other post)? 0 > * If argparse grew an add_getopt_arguments, would you still want to > keep getopt around? And if so, why? Simplicity of the learning curve. Using it is as simple as: getopt.getopt(sys.argv[1:], "a:b", ["alpha=", "beta"]) Does argparse allow anything as simple as that? -- Steven D'Aprano
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