Despite the bug being closed as WONTFIX, at the very least this seems like a valid docs issue. But (for whatever a non-core-dev opinion is worth), I'm +1 both on the proposed solution and deprecation.of `link_to()`
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 10:45 AM Barney Gale email@example.com wrote:
Pathlib's symlink_to() and link_to() methods have different argument orders, so:
a.symlink_to(b) # Creates a symlink from A to B a.link_to(b) # Creates a hard link from B to A
I don't think link_to() was intended to be implemented this way, as the docs say "Create a hard link pointing to a path named target.". It's also inconsistent with everything else in pathlib, most obviously symlink_to().
Bug report here: https://bugs.python.org/issue39291
This /really/ irks me. Apparently it's too late to fix link_to(), so I'd like to suggest we add a new hardlink_to() method that matches the symlink_to() argument order. link_to() then becomes deprecated/undocumented.
Barney _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe send an email to email@example.com https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://firstname.lastname@example.org/message/7QPLYW36... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/