(original) (raw)

> On Apr 8, 2016, at 3:00 PM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com> wrote:
\>
\>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
\>> I personally still like \_\_ospath\_\_ as well.
\>
\> Same here. The strings are essentially an OS-dependent serialization,
\> rather than related to a particular file system.

Huh? I though the strings were a OS-independent, human readable
serialization and interchange format.

Bytes would be the OS-dependent serialization.

But yes, I suppose the file-system-level version would be inodes or something.

But this is a string that represents a path, thus \_\_pathstr\_\_. And the
term "path" is used all over the place (including os.path and pathlib)
for this particular type of path, so I don't see why we need the "fs"
or "os", other than the fact that \_\_path\_\_ is already taken.

But I'm looking forward to using this bike shed regardless of its
color, so that's the last I'll comment on that.

\-CHB