On 22 April 2015 at 03:31, Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org> wrote:
>
> On 04/21/2015 04:50 AM, Tal Einat wrote:
>
> As for the default set of accepted types for various convertors, if we
> could choose any syntax we liked, something like "accept=+{NoneType}"
> would be much better IMO.
>
>
> In theory Argument Clinic could use any syntax it likes. In practice, under
> the covers we tease out one or two bits of non-Python syntax, then run
> ast.parse over it. Saved us a lot of work.
>
> "s: accept={str,NoneType}" is a legal Python parameter declaration; "s:
> accept+={NoneType}" is not. If I could figure out a clean way to hack in
> support for += I'll support it. Otherwise you'll be forced to spell it out.
Ellipsis seems potentially useful here to mean "whatever the default
accepted types are": "s: accept={...,NoneType}"
My other question would be whether we can use "None" in preference to
NoneType, as PEP 484 does:
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/#using-none
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
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