On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:
> - a single os.fspath() with an allow_bytes parameter
> (mostly True in os and os.path, mostly False everywhere
> else)
-0
> - a str-only os.fspathname() and a str/bytes os.fspath()
+1 on using separate functions.
> I'm partial to the first choice as it is simplicity itself to know when
> looking at it if bytes might be coming back by the presence or absence of a
> second argument to the call; otherwise one has to keep straight in one's
> head which is str-only and which might allow bytes (I'm not very good at
> keeping similar sounding functions separate -- what's the difference between
> shutil.copy and shutil.copy2? I have to look it up every time).
I do the same, but... this is one of those cases where a caller will
usually be passing a constant directly. If passed as a positional
argument, it'll just be confusing ("what's True?" is my usual reaction
to a Boolean positional argument). If passed as a keyword argument
with a descriptive name, it'll be longer than I'd like to see:
path_str = os.fspath(path, allow_bytes=True)
Names like os.fspath() and os.fssyspath() seem good to me.
-Fred
--
Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fred at fdrake.net>
"A storm broke loose in my mind." --Albert Einstein
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