Author paul.j3
Recipients amcnabb, bethard, docs@python, guilherme-pg, paul.j3, r.david.murray, v+python
Date 2013-05-06.22:45:44
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1367880345.27.0.562116113891.issue14191@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
This is a revision of the test_intermixed.py that I submitted earlier.  Now `parse_intermixed_args` acts like `parse_args', and calls `parse_known_intermixed_args`.  Again it is form that can exercise the idea without modifying `argparse.py`.

If the parser has incompatible features (REMAINDER, PARSER, or certain exclusive groups), it raises an error.  However to facilitate testing I included a `_fallback` backdoor.  If not default None it will be called instead of raising the error.

While making documentation changes, I got to wondering whether 'interspersed' would be a better term than 'intermixed'.  optparse has an 'interspersed' option and api.  However the getopt documentation does use 'intermixed'.
History
Date User Action Args
2013-05-06 22:45:45paul.j3setrecipients: + paul.j3, amcnabb, bethard, v+python, r.david.murray, docs@python, guilherme-pg
2013-05-06 22:45:45paul.j3setmessageid: <1367880345.27.0.562116113891.issue14191@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2013-05-06 22:45:45paul.j3linkissue14191 messages
2013-05-06 22:45:45paul.j3create