[Python-Dev] PEP 389: argparse - new command line parsing module

[Cameron Simpson]

On 27Sep2009 21:24, Steven Bethard <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote:
| On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 9:09 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
| >> If you think getopt and optparse should stick around in 3.X, why is
| >> that? If you think there are things that getopt and optparse do better
| >> than argparse, could you please give some examples?
| >
| > I personally consider getopt superior to both optparse and argparse.
| > Those are terribly verbose in specifying arguments, whereas getopt's
| > sequence-of-letters is really nice and compact.
| 
| Thanks for the concrete example. Although I'm unconvinced that the
| characters you save in the sequence of letters in the getopt.getopt
| call aren't afterwards wasted on type conversions, if/else statements
| and variable assignments in the subsequent loop, it would be pretty
| simple to add to argparse something like::
| 
|     ArgumentParser.add_getopt_arguments(options[, long_options])

Yes please!

I'm also very fond of the succinct getopt sequence-of-letters style;
it works really well for the simple cases.

Disclaimer: I've not used the optparse et al modules because getopt has
covered my needs and my C background made getopt the natural module to
start with. I have written simple getopt-equivalent option parsers a
number of times though. (Of course, that choice also drives me to adapt
my option wishes to stuff that getopt can do:-)

Clarification: this isn't a vote for preferring getopt, it's a vote for
availability of the sequence-of-letters style.

Cheers,
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

The most annoying thing about being without my files after our disc crash was
discovering once again how widespread BLINK was on the web.