On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Antoine Pitrou
On Mon, 8 Oct 2012 10:06:17 -0600 Andrew McNabb
wrote: Since this really is a matter of personal taste, I'll end my participation in this discussion by voicing support for Nick Coghlan's suggestion of a `join` method, whether it's named `join` or `append` or something else.
The join() method already exists in the current PEP, but it's less convenient, synctatically, than either '[]' or '/'.
Right. My objections boil down to: 1. The case has not been adequately made that a second way to do it is needed. Therefore, the initial version should just include the method API. 2. Using "join" as the method name is a bad idea for the same reason that using "+" as the operator syntax would be a bad idea: it can cause erroneous output instead of an exception if a string is passed where a Path object is expected. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia