[Python-Dev] PEP 355 status

BJörn Lindqvist bjourne at gmail.com
Sun Oct 29 20:33:13 CET 2006

On 10/28/06, Talin <talin at acm.org> wrote:
> BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
> > I'd like to write a post mortem for PEP 355. But one important
> > question that haven't been answered is if there is a possibility for a
> > path-like PEP to succeed in the future? If so, does the path-object
> > implementation have to prove itself in the wild before it can be
> > included in Python? From earlier posts it seems like you don't like
> > the concept of path objects, which others have found very interesting.
> > If that is the case, then it would be nice to hear it explicitly. :)
> So...how's that post mortem coming along? Did you get a sufficient
> answer to your questions?

Yes and no. All posts have very exhaustively explained why the
implementation in PEP 355 is far from optimal. And I can see why it
is. However, what I am uncertain of is Guido's opinion on the
background and motivation of the PEP:

"Many have felt that the API for manipulating file paths as offered in
the os.path module is inadequate."

"Currently, Python has a large number of different functions scattered
over half a dozen modules for handling paths.  This makes it hard for
newbies and experienced developers to to choose the right method."

IMHO, the current API is very messy. But when it comes to PEPs, it is
mostly Guido's opinion that counts. :) Unless he sees a problem with
the current situation, then there is no point in writing more PEPs.

> And the more interesting question is, will the effort to reform Python's
> path functionality continue?

I certainly hope so. But maybe it is better to target Python 3000, or
maybe the Python devs already have ideas for how they want the path
APIs to look like?

> So what happens next?

I really hope that Guido will give his input when he has more time.

Mvh Björn

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list