[Python-Dev] Remaining decisions on PEP 471 -- os.scandir()

Victor Stinner victor.stinner at gmail.com
Tue Jul 15 08:25:52 CEST 2014

Le mardi 15 juillet 2014, Ben Hoyt <benhoyt at gmail.com> a écrit :
> Victor had one other question:
> > What happens to name and full_name with followlinks=True?
> > Do they contain the name in the directory (name of the symlink)
> > or name of the linked file?
> I would say they should contain the name and full path of the entry --
> the symlink, NOT the linked file. They kind of have to, right,
> otherwise they'd have to be method calls that potentially call the
> system.

Sorry, I don't remember who but someone proposed to add the follow_symlinks
parameter in scandir()  directly. If the parameter is added to methods,
there is no such issue.

I like the compromise of adding an optional follow_symlinks to is_xxx() and
stat() method. No need for .lstat().

Again: remove any garantee about the cache in the definitions of methods,
instead copy the doc from os.path and os. Add a global remark saying that
most methods don't need any syscall in general, except for symlinks (with

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140715/cd794d3b/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list