RetroSearch Browse

Mon Apr 11 17:04:29 EDT 2016 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-April/143933.html

On 11.04.2016 22:55, Alexander Walters wrote:
> Every conceivable way to fix pathlib have already been argued. Are any 
> of them worth doing?  Can we get consensus enough to implement one of 
> them?  If not, we should consider either dropping the matter or 
> dropping the module.

Right now, I don't see pathlib removed. Why? Because using strings alone 
has its caveats (we all know that). So, I cannot imagine an alternative 
concept to pathlib right now. We might call it differently, but the 
concept stays unchanged.

MAYBE, if there's an alternative concept, I could be convinced to 
support dropping the module.

Best,
Sven

PS: The only way out that I can imagine is to fix pathlib. I am not in 
favor of fixing functions of "os" and "os.path" to except "path" 
objects; which does the majority here discuss now with the new 
__fspath__ protocol. But shaping what we have is definitely worth it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160411/a66e78b1/attachment.html>

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-April/143933.html below:

[Python-Dev] Maybe, just maybe, pathlib doesn't belong.