[issue6247] should we include argparse

[Gregory P. Smith]

Gregory P. Smith <greg at krypto.org> added the comment:

On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Armin Ronacher <report at bugs.python.org> wrote:
>
> Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher at active-4.com> added the comment:
>
>> @Armin: Doesn't that argument apply to *any* library proposed for
>> inclusion in the standard library? By which logic we should never add
>> anything to the standard library ever again.
>
> That's what I say. Do not add anything to the stdlib that is not needed
> to keep applications platform independent. argparse adds zero value to
> x-platform development.

By that logic we should remove getopt and optparse,

>
> Things I consider good for a stdlib:
>
>  * portable filesystem notification hooks
>  * stuff like os.path
>  * distutils
>  * socket library
>
> Stuff that should not go into the stdlib:
>
>  * xml parsers
>  * command line parsers (one is enough, and that should be
>    *stable* not replaced later with something like argparse)

One is only enough if its a useful one.  argparse can be that one.
optparse and getopt are both sorely lacking.  If anything deprecate
getopt and optparse so that they're gone in 3.4.

By your argument we shouldn't even have one command line parser
because it does nothing to cross platform support.

Please DO NOT drag an issue asking to add a useful library to the set
of batteries included into the packaging decentralization flamewar.
There are is a large python user base that can never code that does
not come as part of python itself for one or more of legal and
technical reasons.  This issue is not the place to debate how stupid
anyone thinks that concept is.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6247>
_______________________________________