[Python-Dev] configparser: should optionxform be idempotent? (original) (raw)
Serhiy Storchaka storchaka at gmail.com
Thu Mar 7 11:40:12 EST 2019
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] configparser: should optionxform be idempotent?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] configparser: should optionxform be idempotent?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
07.03.19 11:18, Inada Naoki пише:
So what should we do about optionxform?
a) Document "optionxform must be idempotent". b) Ensure all APIs calls optionxform exactly once, and document "When you get option name from section objects, it is already optionxform-ed. You can not reuse the option name if optionxform is not idempotent, because optionxform will be applied to the name again." I prefer (a) to (b) because it's simple and easy solution.
I am not expert of configparser, but I prefer (a). The purpose of introducing optionxform was to make lowercasing optional.
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/9e480adf9b3520ea3deb322fd1214f53a2293a0d
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] configparser: should optionxform be idempotent?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] configparser: should optionxform be idempotent?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]