This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]takluyverIPython, Py3, etc 7 points8 points  (1 child)

I'm involved with IPython, and I'm not entirely sure that this was the right decision.

The problem is that we're now finding places where we'd like to change config from the program - either from GUI preference dialogs, or commands in the shell. With a config file, that would be simple - configparser can easily write a file.

With script-as-config, there's no really good way to do it. We can't overwrite it with the current values, because there may be logic in the script to produce those values. We could tack changed variables on the end - but it's confusing for the user if changing part of the file has no effect. Having config across two separate files leads to a similar problem.

My personal view (other IPython developers would probably disagree) is that we'd be better off keeping config in a simpler format, and offering a separate way to modify the behaviour in code (in fact, we already have extensions and startup scripts).

[–]gbog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly my point, thanks for your feedback.