[Python-Dev] The path module PEP (original) (raw)

John J Lee jjl at pobox.com
Wed Jan 25 22:30:02 CET 2006


[Ian Bicking]

Losing .open() would make it much harder for anyone wanting to write, say, a URI library that implements the Path API.

[John]

Why? Could you expand a bit?

What's wrong with urlopen(filesystempathinstance) ?

[Ian]

def readconfig(path): text = path.open().read() ... do something ...

I should have expected that answer, but couldn't believe that you think it's a good idea to implement that obese filesystem path API for URLs ;-)

Shouldn't we instead have:

a) .open()-able objects blessed in the stdlib & stdlib docs, as a separate interface from the path interface (I guess that would be an argument in favour of path implementing that one-method interface, as long as it's not tied too tightly to the fat path interface)

b) a path object with a thinner interface (I know you've already expressed that preference yourself...)?

John



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list