configparser - which one?

[Cameron Simpson]

On 25Mar2019 23:24, Dave <dboland9 at offilive.com> wrote:
>On 3/25/19 10:58 PM, DL Neil wrote:
>>On 26/03/19 1:10 PM, Dave wrote:
>>>I use Python3 3, and expected learning how to use configparser 
>>>would be no big deal.  Well!  Seems there is configparser, 
>>>stdconfigparser, and safeconfigparser, and multiple ways to set 
>>>the section and entries to the section.  A little confusing.  I 
>>>want to future-proof may code, so what should I be using?
>>
>>
>>(with apologies for not answering the question directly)
>>
>>After striking this problem, I was encouraged to take a look at 
>>JSON, and thence YAML. Once there, as they say, didn't look back!
>>- multi-dimensional possibilities, cf .ini
>>- similarity/correspondence with Python data structures
>>- convenient PSL
>>- easily adopted by (power-)users, cf Python code
[...]
>>
>Wish I could do that.  Customer wants .ini.  I would need to sell them 
>on an alternative.  The issue is human readable - .ini is easier for 
>people to understand.

And I agree with the customer, absent more info. Unless you need deeply 
nested stuff, .ini is much easier for humans to read. Not everything is 
a match for it (unless you start playing games with 
"[clause.subclause.subsubclause]" stuff, which I'd argue is a smell 
indicating a format change might be good).

But for stuff which does fit nicely into .ini, it is FAR FAR easier on 
the reader. Like JSON, YAML etc are far far easier than XML for the 
reader.

Lots of stuff, particularly simple configs, go well in .ini.

All that opinion aside: just use the configparser.ConfigParser class. It 
is what _used_ to be "SafeConfigParser" in Python 2.

Here endith the lesson.

Cheers,
Cameron Simpson <cs at cskk.id.au>