On Dec 14, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Steven Bethard <steven.bethard <at> gmail.com> writes: >> >> Please read the PEP if you haven't, particularly the "Why isn't the >> functionality just being added to optparse?" section. I don't believe >> it is sensible to re-implement all of optparse. What Ian Bicking is >> proposing, I believe, is simpler -- adding a few aliases here and >> there so that you don't have to rename so many things when you're >> upgrading from optparse to argparse. > > Although I am of the people who think working modules shouldn't be > deprecated, I > also don't think adding compatibility aliases is a good idea. They only make > the > APIs more bloated and maintenance more tedious. Let's keep the new APIs clean > of > any unnecessary baggage.
Agreed. If you want to make an "adapter" to do things like convert 'int' to int, then call the new API then fine, but don't start crufting up a new API to make it 'easier' to convert. All crufting it up does is make it _less_ clear how to use the new API by bring along things that don't belong in it. S _______________________________________________ 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
