[Python-ideas] URLs/URIs + pathlib.Path + literal syntax = ?

[Koos Zevenhoven]

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:31 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:
> On 03/29/2016 07:42 AM, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
>
>> While I think that the decisions about p-strings (or a-strings for
>> addresses or whatever they should be) should keep URIs in mind, it is
>> premature to add the Path+URI fusion into the stdlib. I agree with
>> Paul Moore that this URL stuff should be on PyPI first. It could even
>> be library that monkey patches pathlib to accept URIs. Or a URI
>> library that instantiates Path objects when appropriate. Then there
>> could be a smooth transition into the stdlib some day.
>
>
> Pathlib is already complicated; unless we would be doing the same types of
> operations, and have the same mental model, there would be no point in
> trying to support URIs with Pathlib.

Agreed. I think the main benefits besides flexibility would indeed be
to be able to use the same mental model (and added syntax?) with Paths
and URIs as long as you do operations that make sense with the
different 'addresses'. If you need something more specific, the
subclasses can still add whatever features make sense for the given
scheme/protocol.

- Koos