[stdlib-sig] Breaking out the stdlib

[Paul Moore]

2009/9/15 Michael Foord <michael at voidspace.org.uk>:
> Evolving an existing library, as a rule, is definitely better than replacing
> it with a new one. There is a cost involved in removing a library. It isn't
> always possible though to meet requirements with an existing API - as is the
> case with optparse / argparse.

MAL pointed out http://code.activestate.com/recipes/573441/ - extended
optparse to allow definition of required options. Given that one of
the requirements that argparse is claimed to meet where optparse
doesn't is supporting required arguments, how come this simple recipe
hasn't been incorporated into optparse?

The optparse/argparse case seems to rest on the argument that optparse
cannot be extended to do what argparse does. It seems like this isn't
true for all requirements. (And maybe some others could be addressed
by judiciously deprecating support for specific internal details that
maybe should not have been documented in the first place...)

Paul.