Glenn Linderman added the comment: Yes, a second function would give more flexibility.
Due to the "approval" in msg166175 to use the name parse_intermixed_args for the functionality described there, it would probably be best to use that name for that functionality. So then we are left naming your current function something else. parse_known_intermixed_args certainly is descriptive, and fits the naming conventions of the other methods in the class. Quite long, unfortunately... but then I doubt it will get used much. I am using parse_intermixed_args regularly (via my wrapper class), and it is quite long enough. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14191> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
