At 12:08 PM 6/27/2005 +1200, Tony Meyer wrote:

[Reinhold Birkenfeld]

...

...

One more issue is open: the one of naming. As "path" is already the name of a module, what would the new object be called to avoid confusion? pathobj? objpath? Path?

[Michael Hoffman]

...

I would argue for Path.

Granted "path" is actually os.path, but I don't think it's wise to have stdlib modules whose names are differentiated only by case, especially on Windows (and other case-insensitive filesystems).

This is the name of a *class*, not a module. I.e., we are discussing adding a Path class to the 'os' module, that implements the interface of the "path" module. We can't call it "path" (as a top-level module) because the interface will not be backward-compatible with current uses and installations of the "path" module.