While I'm -1 on the original proposal, I think the idea of PurePath.__len__ returning the number of components in the path may be worth some further consideration. Also, I'm not convinced that having indexing is a necessary prerequisite to pursue it further. On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 8:14 AM Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 02:27:00PM +0300, Ram Rachum wrote:
Today I wrote a script and did this:
sorted(paths, key=lambda path: len(str(path)), reverse=True)
But it would have been nicer if I could do this:
sorted(paths, key=len, reverse=True)
It would have been even nicer if we could compose functions:
sorted(paths, key=len∘str, reverse=True)
*semi-wink*
So I implemented `PurePath.__len__` as `str(len(path))`.
Serhiy and Remi objected, because it might not be obvious that the length of the path would be the length of string.
It isn't obvious to me that the length of a path is the length of the string representation of that path.
I thought that the length of the path would be the number of path components:
/tmp/file # length 2
I wouldn't have predicted that was the length of the string representation of the path.
-- Steven _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/RHOPEZ... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/