optparse alternative

[Steven Bethard]

Henry Ludemann wrote:
> I've been writing an optparse alternative (using getopt) that is at a
> stage where I'd be interested in people's opinions.

Looks interesting, but is it really that different from optparse?

I do like the fact that you can specify a type with a conversion 
function.  (In optparse, AFAIK, to add a new type you have to write your 
own subclass of Option that screws with Option.TYPES and 
Option.TYPE_CHECKER, which I've always thought was kinda nasty.)

But I wonder if it wouldn't be better to extend optparse with the 
functionality instead of writing an entirely new module...

STeVe