On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Olemis Lang
I thought that one of the following approaches would be considered :
- let optparse remain in stdlib (as is or not ...) - re-implement optparse (i.e. a module having the same name ;o) using argparse
isn't it ?
Please read the PEP if you haven't, particularly the "Why isn't the functionality just being added to optparse?" section. I don't believe it is sensible to re-implement all of optparse. What Ian Bicking is proposing, I believe, is simpler -- adding a few aliases here and there so that you don't have to rename so many things when you're upgrading from optparse to argparse. For what it's worth, I'm still not sure it's a good idea, for exactly the reason Ian points out - "having another class like OptionParser also feels like backward compatibility cruft". Steve -- Where did you get that preposterous hypothesis? Did Steve tell you that? --- The Hiphopopotamus