paul j3 <ajipa...@gmail.com> added the comment:
At least until these latest deprecations, the only nesting that made sense was to put a mutually_exclusive_group inside an argument_group. This was a way of providing a title and description for the exclusive_group. (And not documented.) I don't know if that's still possible. 'required' only makes sense for the exclusive_group. I don't know what happens when one tries to give it to an argument_group. If it doesn't raise an error, I expect it to be ignored. argument_groups are only used for help formatting; they have no role in parsing. exclusive_groups are primarily a parsing checking tool. Usage formatting tries to display exclusive groups, but is easily broken. While mutually_exclusive_group is a subclass of argument_group (and that in turn a subclass of argument_container), very little usage or behavior is inherited. Don't expect any consistency. A key point, that is easily lost, is that all groups share the _actions list with the parser. When an argument is added a group (either kind), it is, in effect, added to the parser's _actions list. So when parsing, there's only one list of Actions. A group will also keep the Action in its own _group_actions list, which is used for formatting or for exclusive checking. But otherwise the _group_actions list not used for parsing. Another point, is that there are 2 default argument_groups. Thus every Action is in an _group_actions list. If an exclusive_group is not nested in an argument_group, its Actions will be added to one of the defaults (optionals or positionals). ---------- nosy: +paul.j3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue46058> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
