[Python-ideas] Promoting the adoption of pathlib [Was: Working with Path objects: p-strings?]

[Ethan Furman]

On 03/31/2016 10:36 AM, Alexander Walters wrote:
> On 3/31/2016 13:32, Ethan Furman wrote:
>> On 03/31/2016 10:27 AM, Alexander Walters wrote:
>>
>>> I think this is missing step zero.  What does pathlib even offer me, the
>>> library developer?  Why should I use it?  I cannot be the only person
>>> who does not understand why it exists, let alone why I should be using
>>> it in my libraries.
>>
>> Easier path manipulations.
>
> Are path manipulations hard?  I have never run into anything that I
> couldn't solve trivially with os.path.  Is this really all this is for?

I wouldn't call the contortions I have had to go through to use 
os.path.* functions "trivial".  YMMV.

> If you want to promote pathlib use, really sell pathlib's benefits. the
> patches to the standard library will come later if people actually want
> to use it.

Two points:

0) I personally have no interest in promoting pathlib -- I wrote my
    own path library.

1) Part of promoting pathlib is getting the stdlib to use it;
    otherwise it's a pretty high pain point doing all the
    string <-> Path conversions oneself.  Again, YMMV.

I also think creating pathlib was only half the job -- it should have 
been integrated into the stdlib at the same time.

--
~Ethan~