This stance was probably already argued in the threads in question. This thread is more of a health-check. As an observer, it did not look like any headway was being made, and I suggested the solimaic solution. It has been pointed out to me that headway IS being made and they are close to a solution. I think this thread can safely be sunset. On 4/11/2016 17:04, Sven R. Kunze wrote: > 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. > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev at python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/tritium-list%40sdamon.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160411/5b2e8068/attachment-0001.html>
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