Repository navigation
Switch from argparse to Typer聽#183
Description
馃殌 Feature
Use Typer instead of argparse
Have you read the Contributing Guidelines on Pull Requests?
Yes
Motivation
I have made applications using both Typer and argparse, and the developer and user experience with Typer is far better in my opinion.
Pitch
This feature reduces a lot of code and also uses modern features like decorators for sub-command handlers, etc. It is cross platform. It will reduce code complexity, allowing new and beginner programmers to contribute.
Activity
github-actions commentedon Apr 6, 2022
Hi馃憢 thanks for creating your first issue for IOSF, Will get back to you soon !.
GouravSardana commentedon Apr 6, 2022
@pybash1 Thanks for your wonderful advice. Can you show me some of the packages which uses this thing ?
we need more clarity before moving to any parser.
cc @pranavbaburaj @PradyumnaKrishna @peb-peb
pybash1 commentedon Apr 7, 2022
@GouravSardana It's hard for me to remember an example right now, but if I can remember any, I will let you know.
peb-peb commentedon Apr 8, 2022
I played around with
Typerand it's a wonderful tool, but refactoring and moving fromargparsetoTyperis a negative from my side. Because even if we refactor the code, it would not change anything major and add to the dependency of the project.Typer does bring a method for autocompletion in the terminal itself, but it's not the kind of autocomplete that we're looking for (we're looking for the TAB completion style of autocompletion).
But, in it's defense, I would say that it's really beginner-friendly, easy to implement, and has many awesome features.
@GouravSardana @pranavbaburaj what's your opinion on this?
lainq commentedon Apr 8, 2022
I would be totally fine with porting to typer, if everyone's happy with the decision.
GouravSardana commentedon Apr 18, 2022
We're not in favour of moving from argparser to Typer.
cc @pranavbaburaj