[Python-Dev] pathlib - current status of discussions

Donald Stufft donald at stufft.io
Mon Apr 11 18:38:56 EDT 2016

> On Apr 11, 2016, at 5:58 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:
> name:
> ----
> We are down to two choices:
> - __fspath__, or
> - __fspathname__
> The final choice I suspect will be affected by the choice to allow (or not) bytes.

+1 on __fspath__, -0 on __fspathname__

> add a Path ABC:
> --------------
> undecided

I think it makes sense to add it, but maybe only in 3.6? Path accepting code could be updated to do something like `isinstance(obj, (bytes, str, PathMeta))` which seems like a net win to me.

> Sticking points:
> ---------------
> Do we allow bytes to be returned from os.fspath()?  If yes, then do we allow bytes from __fspath__()?

I think yes and yes, it seems like making it needlessly harder to deal with a bytes path in the scenarios that you’re actually dealing with them is the kind of change that 3.0 made that ended up getting rolled back where it could.

Donald Stufft
PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160411/4d916038/attachment.sig>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list