[Python-ideas] PEP 428: poll about the joining syntax
ncoghlan at gmail.com
Tue Oct 9 10:31:42 CEST 2012
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:22 PM, INADA Naoki <songofacandy at gmail.com> wrote:
> -1 on `pathjoin`. `Path.pathjoin` is ugly.
> The `urljoin()` is OK because it is just a function.
Hmm, this is a *very* interesting point. *All* of the alternatives
presented are mainly replacements for just doing this:
And if you want a partially applied version, that's just:
prefix = functools.partial(Path, p)
So perhaps the right answer for the initial API is: no method, no
operator, just use the constructor?
The counterargument is that this approach doesn't let "p" control the
return type the way a method or operator does, though.
It does suggest a whole new class of verbs though, like "make" or "build".
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
More information about the Python-ideas