| msg341210 - (view) |
Author: CJ Kucera (apocalyptech) * |
Date: 2019-05-01 15:20 |
| It'd be nice to have an option to os.walk which would return DirEntry objects in its return tuple, as opposed to just the string filenames/dirnames. (Or failing that, an alternate function which does so.) The function already uses os.scandir() internally, so the DirEntry objects already exist -- I assume it'd be a pretty easy change. At the moment, if I want to be efficient and use os.scandir() myself, I've got to basically reimplement os.walk(), which seems silly since os.walk is already calling scandir itself. |
|
|
| msg341214 - (view) |
Author: CJ Kucera (apocalyptech) * |
Date: 2019-05-01 16:11 |
| I've started up a Github PR for this, btw, though IMO it's not really in a mergeable state yet: 1) I wasn't sure what to do about os.fwalk(), since that *doesn't* already generate DirEntry objects, and this change would introduce a small inconsistency between the two, functionalitywise. 2) Also wasn't sure what to do about unit tests, though I'll ponder that some more once I've got some time later. 3) The actual implementation is pretty trivial, but could perhaps be handled differently. The systems's still processing my CLA signature, as well, so there's that too. :) |
|
|
| msg341223 - (view) |
Author: Stéphane Wirtel (matrixise) *  |
Date: 2019-05-01 18:23 |
| Hi, I think you have to create a new function and not to modify the current os.walk(), just because you change the type of the returned value. We have to avoid the inconsistency for the caller of os.walk(). is it a list of DirEntry or another list? |
|
|
| msg341226 - (view) |
Author: CJ Kucera (apocalyptech) * |
Date: 2019-05-01 18:34 |
| Yeah, I'd wondered that too (re: a separate function) but it seemed like an awful lot of duplicated code. The PR I'd put through just changes the datatypes within the `filenames` and `dirnames` lists... I'd been thinking that'd be sufficient since you wouldn't get that without specifying the optional boolean, but perhaps not. |
|
|
| msg341510 - (view) |
Author: Stéphane Wirtel (matrixise) * |
Date: 2019-05-06 14:39 |
| And another solution, you could use the pathlib.Path class for your project. Have a nice day, |
|
|
| msg341513 - (view) |
Author: Stéphane Wirtel (matrixise) * |
Date: 2019-05-06 14:45 |
| I would like to have the advices of Serhiy. |
|
|
| msg341516 - (view) |
Author: Serhiy Storchaka (serhiy.storchaka) * |
Date: 2019-05-06 15:01 |
| I concur with Stéphane. The boolean option for changing the type of the returned value is considered a bad design. |
|
|
| msg341523 - (view) |
Author: Stéphane Wirtel (matrixise) * |
Date: 2019-05-06 15:13 |
| Thank you for your contribution but as discussed in this issue, we prefer to have a new function and not a new boolean flag. Here is my suggestions. * Create an other PR where you add a new function * Change the title of this issue. Thank you |
|
|
| msg341524 - (view) |
Author: CJ Kucera (apocalyptech) * |
Date: 2019-05-06 15:15 |
| Will do, thanks for the input! |
|
|