Thank you VERY much for mentioning argparse- this is EXACTLY what I needed! Thank you!
On 8/23/07, Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Omari Norman wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 05:31:00PM -0400, Jay Loden wrote: > >> Robert Dailey wrote: > >>> Well, I don't know what is wrong with people then. I don't see how > >>> required arguments are of bad design. > > > >> I tend to agree...while "required option" may be an oxymoron in > >> English, I can think of quite a few scripts I've written myself (in > >> various languages) that needed at least some kind of user input to > >> operate. > > > > The idea with optparse is not that programs should not require certain > > information on the command line; rather, the idea is that this > > information should be positional arguments, not 'options'. > > > > That is, to use the compiler example: > > > > compiler file > > > > is preferred if a file argument is necessary. > > > > compiler --file file > > > > is not preferred. > > I agree with the optparse philosophy, but Practicality Beats Purity. > That's why I was convinced to add "required options" to argparse -- > there are too many applications that want that kind of interface. > *I* don't write applications with interfaces like that, but enough > people do that the use case should really be supported. > > STeVe > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list >
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
