Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!rt.uk.eu.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.000 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'scripts': 0.03; 'explicitly': 0.05; 'default.': 0.09; 'from:addr:ethan': 0.09; 'from:addr:stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'from:name:ethan furman': 0.09; 'message-id:@stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'option,': 0.09; 'received:184.172': 0.09; 'received:gator410.hostgator.com': 0.09; 'subject:Why': 0.09; 'subject:module': 0.09; '~ethan~': 0.09; 'belongs': 0.16; 'command-line': 0.16; 'make,': 0.16; 'ought': 0.16; 'really?': 0.16; 'received:67.18.44': 0.16; 'subject:argparse': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'library': 0.18; 'code,': 0.22; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; 'config': 0.24; "shouldn't": 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'raise': 0.29; 'easier': 0.31; "d'aprano": 0.31; 'libraries': 0.31; 'steven': 0.31; 'framework': 0.33; 'subject:the': 0.34; 'could': 0.34; 'but': 0.35; 'charset:us-ascii': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'application': 0.37; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'catch': 0.60; 'received:173': 0.61 Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:36:37 -0700 From: Ethan Furman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Why is the argparse module so inflexible? References: <51CC42E3.3070508@gmail.com> <51ccc190$0$29999$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> In-Reply-To: <51ccc190$0$29999$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator410.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - python.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - stoneleaf.us X-BWhitelist: no X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: ([173.12.184.233]) [173.12.184.233]:48949 X-Source-Auth: ethan+stoneleaf.us X-Email-Count: 2 X-Source-Cap: dG9idWs7dG9idWs7Z2F0b3I0MTAuaG9zdGdhdG9yLmNvbQ== X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 19 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1372469806 news.xs4all.nl 15877 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:52450 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:49396 On 06/27/2013 03:49 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > [rant] > I think it is lousy design for a framework like argparse to raise a > custom ArgumentError in one part of the code, only to catch it elsewhere > and call sys.exit. At the very least, that ought to be a config option, > and off by default. > > Libraries should not call sys.exit, or raise SystemExit. Whether to quit > or not is not the library's decision to make, that decision belongs to > the application layer. Yes, the application could always catch > SystemExit, but it shouldn't have to. So a library that is explicitly designed to make command-line scripts easier and friendlier should quit with a traceback? Really? -- ~Ethan~