[Python-Dev] Maybe, just maybe, pathlib doesn't belong. (original) (raw)

Random832 random832 at fastmail.com
Mon Apr 11 18:56:05 EDT 2016

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016, at 17:15, Ethan Furman wrote:

So we're trying to make option 2 work before falling back to option 1.

If you have a way to make pathlib work with the stdlib that doesn't involve "fixing" os and os.path, now is the time to speak up.

Fully general re-dispatch from argument types on any call to a function that raises TypeError or NotImplemented? [e.g. call Path.missing_func(os.open, path, mode)]

Have pathlib monkey-patch things at import?

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016, at 17:43, Sven R. Kunze wrote:

So, I might add:

3. add more high-level features to pathlib to prevent a downgrade to os or os.path

  1. reimplement the entire ecosystem in every walled garden so no-one has to leave their walled gardens.

What's the point of batteries being included if you can't wire them to anything?

I don't get what you mean by this whole "different level of abstraction" thing, anyway. The fact that there is one obvious thing to want to do with open and a Path strongly suggests that that should be able to be done by passing the Path to open.

Also, what level of abstraction is builtin open? Maybe we should just leave os alone on the grounds of some holy sacred lowest-level-itude, but allow io and shutils to accept Path?

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list