Message187669
| Author |
paul.j3 |
| Recipients |
amcnabb, bethard, docs@python, guilherme-pg, paul.j3, r.david.murray, v+python |
| Date |
2013年04月23日.21:22:13 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1366752133.34.0.173016193352.issue14191@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Yes, http://bugs.python.org/msg166175 does use 'parse_args' in the second call. But I think things would be more flexible if we had a second function:
def parse_???(self, args=None, namespace=None):
args, argv = self.parse_intermixed_args(args, namespace)
if argv:
msg = _('unrecognized arguments: %s')
self.error(msg % ' '.join(argv))
return args
But then what would a be a good pair of names?
parse??? and parse_intermixed_args
versus
parse_intermixed_args and parse_known_intermixed_args
or
something else? |
|