[Python-Dev] pathlib+os/shutil feedback (original) (raw)
Sven R. Kunze srkunze at mail.de
Mon Apr 11 16:39:19 EDT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] pathlib+os/shutil feedback
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] pathlib+os/shutil feedback
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 10.04.2016 16:51, Paul Moore wrote:
On 10 April 2016 at 15:07, Sven R. Kunze <srkunze at mail.de> wrote:
If there's some agreement to change things with respect to those 5 points, I am willing to put some time into it. In broad terms I agree with these points. Thanks for doing the research. It would certainly be good to try to improve pathlib based on this sort of feedback while it is still provisional.
I'd appreciate some guidance on this. Just let me know what I can do since I don't know the processes of hacking CPython.
""" Path.rglob(pattern) Walk down a given path; a wrapper for "os.scandir"/"os.listdir". """
However, at least in 3.5, Path.rglob does not wrap scandir. There's a difference in principle, in that scandir (DirEntry) objects cache stat data, where pathlib does not. Whether that makes using scandir in Path.rglob impossible, I don't know. Ideally I'd like to see pathlib modified to use scandir (because otherwise there will always be people saying "use os.walk rather than scandir, as it's faster) - or if it's not possible to do so because of the difference in principle, then I'd like to see a clear discussion of the issue in the docs, including the recommended approach for people who want scandir performance without having to abandon pathlib for lower level functions.
Good point. The proposed docstring was just to illustrate the functionality to the uninformed reader. People mostly trust the docs without digging deeper but they should be accurate of course.
Best, Sven
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] pathlib+os/shutil feedback
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] pathlib+os/shutil feedback
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]