Le 20/08/2014 07:08, Nick Coghlan a écrit : > > It's not just the JVM that says text and binary APIs should be separate > - it's every widely used operating system services layer except POSIX. > The POSIX way works well *if* everyone reliably encodes things as UTF-8 > or always uses encoding detection, but its failure mode is unfortunately > silent data corruption. > > That said, there's a lot of Python software that is POSIX specific, > where bytes paths would be the least of the barriers to porting to > Windows or Jython. I'm personally +1 on consistently allowing binary > paths in lower level APIs, but disallowing them in higher level > explicitly cross platform abstractions like pathlib. I fully agree with Nick's position here. To elaborate specifically about pathlib, it doesn't handle bytes paths but allows you to generate them if desired: https://docs.python.org/3/library/pathlib.html#operators Adding full bytes support to pathlib would have added a lot of complication and fragility in the implementation *and* in the API (is it allowed to combine str and bytes paths? should they have separate classes?), for arguably little benefit. I think if you want low-level features (such as unconverted bytes paths under POSIX), it is reasonable to point you to low-level APIs. Regards Antoine.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4