David Lyon wrote: > It's just too hard to do and adds another layer of complexity to > deal with.
Hence something like xml for a prototype and discussion - I did not suggest to use xml for the end product package. I have as much love for xml as the next python guy. > I don't like nesting in configuration files. I tend to side with > the configparser approach of not allowing nesting. More importantly > than that, I don't believe that this particular use case gets > complicated enough to require nesting. > I think nested conditions for configurations is a must-have. Once you have more than 2-3 variables, doing it like PEP 390 is not really manageable. Particularly for C extensions, having many configurations is quite common in my experience. > Primary concern is using something that exists or will work > on 'most' python versions. I'm not sure how many python 1.5 > thrillseekers still use 1.5 solely anymore. But if there are > some, configparser shouldn't offend them. > I don't think python 1.5 should be considered - I happen to contribute to scons, which is a build tool in python, and supports all python versions from 1.5.2: the 1.5 requirement is a real downside. You can't use list comprehension, you need apply instead of f(*args, **kw), you don't have subprocess for reliable process execution, and I am not even talking about testing. David _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
