On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 4:59 AM Alex Hall <alex.mojaki@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 1:42 PM Bernardo Sulzbach <bernardo@bernardosulzbach.com> wrote:
...  I would expect len(p) to be the "depth" of the path, which doesn't make a lot of sense if it is not an absolute path.

I agree. I expect iteration, indexing, and length to refer to parts, not characters. In particular I'm a bit disappointed that `path[-1]` isn't equal to `path.name`, especially because finding `path.name` was tricky - at first I guessed path.basename (doesn't exist) and path.stem (close, but wrong). Can we implement that instead?

+1 on that!

I can't say I have better names to suggest, but I find it remarkably difficult to figure out how to get the parts of a Path that I want

path[:-1] would really hand, too, and presumably come along with any indexing.

-CHB

--
Christopher Barker, PhD

Python Language Consulting
  - Teaching
  - Scientific Software Development
  - Desktop GUI and Web Development
  - wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython