[Python-ideas] pathlib suggestions

[Todd]

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Stephan Houben <stephanh42 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> It seems to me that the correct algorithm to get the "full suffix" is not
> to take everything after the FIRST dot,
> but rather to:
> 1. Recognize that the last suffix is one of the UNIX-style compression
> tools .Z, .gz, ,bz2, .xz, .lzma (at least)
> 2. Then add the next-to-last suffix.
>
> So we can then determine that the suffix of
>   order.for.tar.ps.gz
> is .ps.gz and the basename is order.for.tar .
>
> However, I am not sure if we want to hard-code a list of such suffixes in
> the standard library.
> (Even though it could be user-extensible.)
>
> Stephan
>


Those are just examples that I encounter a lot, there can be other cases
where multiple extensions are used.


>
> 2017-01-25 16:33 GMT+01:00 Todd <toddrjen at gmail.com>:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Petr Viktorin <encukou at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/25/2017 04:04 PM, Todd wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:25 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull
>>>> <turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp
>>>> <mailto:turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>     I'm just going to let fly with the +1s and -1s, don't take them too
>>>>     seriously, they're basically impressionistic (I'm not a huge user of
>>>>     pathlib yet).
>>>>
>>>>     Todd writes:
>>>>
>>>>      > So although the names are tentative, perhaps there could be a
>>>>     "fullsuffix"
>>>>      > property to return the extensions as a single string,
>>>>
>>>>     -0      '.'.join(p.suffixes) vs. p.fullsuffix?  TOOWTDI says no.  I
>>>>             also don't really see the use case.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The whole point of pathlib is to provide convenience functions for
>>>> common path-related operations.  It is full of methods and properties
>>>> that could be implemented other ways.
>>>>
>>>> Dealing with multi-part extensions, at least for me, is extremely
>>>> common.  A ".tar.gz" file is not the same as a ".tar.bz2" or a
>>>> ".svg.gz".  When I want to find a ".tar.gz" file, having to deal with
>>>> the ".tar" and ".gz" parts separately is nothing but a nuisance.  If I
>>>> want to find and extract ".rar" files, I don't want ".part1.rar" files,
>>>> ".part2.rar" files, and so on.  So for me dealing with the extension as
>>>> a single unit, rather than individual parts, is the most common
>>>> approach.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But what if the .tar.gz file is called "spam-4.2.5-final.tar.gz"?
>>> Existing tools like glob and endswith() can deal with the ".tar.gz"
>>> extension reliably, but "fullsuffix" would, arguably, not give the answers
>>> you want.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I wouldn't use it in that situation.  The existing "suffix" and "stem"
>> properties also only work reliably under certain situations.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps more specialized tools would be useful, though, for example:
>>>     repacked_path = original_path.replace_suffix(".tar.gz", ".zip")
>>>
>>>
>> That is helpful if I want to rename, not if I want to (for example)
>> uncompress a file.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Python-ideas mailing list
>> Python-ideas at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20170125/b2878507/attachment-0001.html>