[Python-ideas] Pathlib additions & changes
aquavitae69 at gmail.com
Mon Jun 22 18:44:27 CEST 2015
On 22 Jun 2015 17:59, "Paul Moore" <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22 June 2015 at 15:59, Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 6:30 PM, David Townshend <aquavitae69 at gmail.com>
> >> 3. There are several other minor irritations where a common pattern
> >> requires several lines or the use of a lower-level library such as
> >> For example:
> >> * Recursively remove a directory (no sane way using pathlib alone)
> >> shutil.rmtree(str(path))
> > I'm not sure shutil should be considered a lower-level library. It's a
> > separate set of tools aimed at shell-like functionality. Removing a
> > directory tree seems right for shutil; what if shutil.rmtree() would
> > accept a Path object as an alternative to a str? That'd make
> > reasonable sense, and it'd feel like the two modules were working well
> > together.
> Agreed, shutil is higher level than pathlib, not lower.
> Having more stdlib functions (shutil is the most obvious example, but
> there are others) take pathlib.Path objects as well as strings would
> be a good change (and would set a nice example for 3rd party file
> manipulation modules). I'm sure the usual "patches welcome" applies
> The main irritation about using "higher level" modules with path
> objects is the proliferation of str() calls. Accepting path objects
> natively fixes that:
> from shutil import rmtree
> looks fine to me.
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas at python.org
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
I was going on the fact that the PEP talks about possibly including shutil
functions, but I have no problem with making them accept Paths instead. If
that's the best approach I'll see if I can put together a patch.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas