(original) (raw)

Let's start in 3.6 with all this. I added path to 3.4 because I didn't
realize it was in security-mode only. I've now undone all my work
there. Let's not disturb it again, not even its docs.

I don't think there's an "upstream" repo for pathlib (like there still
is for asyncio) and I don't think there's much of a point in
supporting \_\_fspath\_\_ in pathlib if there's no os.fspath(). It would
only encourage hackery in apps that want to play with \_\_fspath\_\_.

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
\> Three questions:
\>
\> Should pathlib gain \_\_fspath\_\_() all the way back to 3.4?
\> Should pathlib's constructor support \_\_fspath\_\_() all the way back to 3.4?
\> (separate question as os.fspath() will only be in 3.6; and if we backport
\> I'm not looking forward to making Typeshed happy w/o os.PathLike being
\> available only in 3.6 :/)
\> Should the docs from 3.4 and forward reflect the removal of the provisional
\> status? (I assume yes, but wanted to double-check)
\>
\> And a quick thanks to Guido for removing \`path\` from pathlib for me already.
\> :)
\>
\> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\> Python-Dev mailing list
\> Python-Dev@python.org
\> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
\> Unsubscribe:
\> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
\>



\--
\--Guido van Rossum (python.org/\~guido)