Fuzzyman wrote:
> cfg = ConfigObj(newfilename)
> cfg['key'] = 'value'
> cfg['key2'] = ['value1', 'value2', 'value3']
> cfg['section'] = {'key': 'value', 'key2': ['value1', 'value2', 'value3']}
If the main purpose is to support this kind of notational
convenience, then I'd be inclined to require all the values
used with this API to be concrete strings, lists or dicts.
If you're going to make types part of the API, I think it's
better to do so with a firm hand rather than being half-
hearted and wishy-washy about it.
Then, if it's really necessary to support a wider variety
of types, provide an alternative API that separates the
different cases and isn't type-dependent at all. If someone
has a need for this API, using it isn't going to be much
of an inconvenience, since he won't be able to write out
constructors for his types using notation as compact as
the above anyway.
--
Greg
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
