PEP on path module for standard library
gsakkis at rutgers.edu
Fri Jul 22 01:53:54 CEST 2005
"Reinhold Birkenfeld" <reinhold-birkenfeld-nospam at wolke7.net> wrote:
> > Why did Guido want a PEP? Is it because he likes the idea but
> > feels the feature set needs to be examined a bit more by the wider
> > community, or is it some other reason?
> He said,
> Whoa! Do we really need a completely different mechanism for doing the
> same stuff we can already do? The path module seems mostly useful for
> folks coming from Java who are used to the Java Path class. With the
> massive duplication of functionality we should also consider what to
> recommend for the future: will the old os.path module be deprecated,
> or are we going to maintain both alternatives forever? (And what about
> all the duplication with the os module itself, like the cwd()
> constructor?) Remember TOOWTDI.
Duplication is a valid point for debate, so the PEP should definitely address it. IMO os.path and
most (if not all) other equivalent modules and functions should be deprecated, though still working
until 2.9 for backwards compatibility, and dropped for python 3K.
More information about the Python-list