- Python Home
- About
- News
- Documentation
- Downloads
- Community
- Foundation
- Developer's Guide
- Issue Tracker
- Issues
- Summaries
- User
- Administration
- Help
Message132220
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | bethard |
|---|---|
| Recipients | andersk, bethard, davidben, drm, eric.araujo, eric.smith, gdb, nelhage, r.david.murray |
| Date | 2011-03-26.09:53:55 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.002633656 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1301133238.16.0.631066091957.issue9334@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Thanks for the analysis Eric. Yeah, it does seem like it's not possible to implement this feature request while still supporting optionals with variable number arguments. @andersk: Would the restriction to only having flags with a fixed number of arguments be acceptable for your use case? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2011-03-26 09:53:58 | bethard | set | recipients: + bethard, eric.smith, eric.araujo, r.david.murray, andersk, gdb, nelhage, drm, davidben |
| 2011-03-26 09:53:58 | bethard | set | messageid: <1301133238.16.0.631066091957.issue9334@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2011-03-26 09:53:55 | bethard | link | issue9334 messages |
| 2011-03-26 09:53:55 | bethard | create | |

