Well, looks like this proposal is dead in the water. Thanks for your opinions everybody, I'll close the PR.

Also, for Alex and Richard, `path.parts` would do the trick.

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 2:55 PM Richard Damon <Richard@damon-family.org> wrote:
On 5/24/20 7:27 AM, Ram Rachum wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I submitted a PR today, and Serhiy decided it needs a discussion on
> python-ideas and agreement from core developers before it could go
> forward.
>
> BPO: https://bugs.python.org/issue40752 
> PR: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/20348
>
> 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)
>
> 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. 
>
> What do you think? Can I get some +1s and -1s for this change?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ram.

While the length of the string representation might be one definition of
length, so might the 'depth' (how many directory levels down does it
go), and that might be considered more fundamental, and thus a better
choice if anything was defined as its 'length' (which I am not sure it
should).

Length (as you are using it) is really a sequence like property, and
paths are that much like a sequence.

--
Richard Damon
_______________________________________________
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/7ZQM3E6EZ4N456HYGWN65GGDV3HEIVPR/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/