Message166087
Yeah, overwriting the existing parser is probably not typically what the user intended.
However, I could see someone doing this if, say, they had a parser designed by another module writer, and they wanted to use it but just change one of the sub-parsers or something like that. But a "set_parser" method would probably make more sense for this use case than "add_parser".
I guess my recommendation is to add a "set_parser" method that replaces the old parser (like "add_parser" does now), and then issue deprecation warnings in "add_parser" if a parser with the given name is present (like the patch does, but with deprecation warnings instead of exceptions).
We could then turn the warnings into errors in a few releases. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2012-07-21 22:29:29 | bethard | set | recipients:
+ bethard, r.david.murray, eacb |
2012-07-21 22:29:29 | bethard | set | messageid: <1342909769.21.0.690189438618.issue14856@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2012-07-21 22:29:28 | bethard | link | issue14856 messages |
2012-07-21 22:29:28 | bethard | create | |
|