PyWart: os.path needs immediate attention!

rantingrick rantingrick at
Tue Aug 2 12:03:19 EDT 2011

On Aug 1, 3:19 am, Teemu Likonen <tliko... at> wrote:
> * 2011-07-30T10:57:29+10:00 * Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Teemu Likonen wrote:
> >> Pathnames and the separator for pathname components should be
> >> abstracted away, to a pathname object.
> > Been there, done that, floundered on the inability of people to work
> > out the details.
> >
> I'm very much a Lisp person and obviously got the idea of pathname
> objects from Common Lisp. Lazily I'm also learning Python too but at the
> moment I can't comment on the details of that PEP. Yet, generally I
> think that's the way to improve pathnames, not the "rantinrick's".

This thread was intended to expose another PyWart and get the
community juices flowing. os.path is broken and cannot be repaired
because os.path was an improper API to begin with. The only way to
solve this problem is to introduce a new Path object.

A new Path object is the answer.

Some have said "been there, done that" with a sarcastic and defeatist
point of view. I say we need to re-visit the proposal of PEP-0355 and
hash out something quickly. We also need to realize that one day or
another this Path object is going to become reality and the longer we
drag our feet getting it implemented the more painful the transition
is going to be.

I feel Python community is in an awkward teenage stage at this point
not really sure of it's self or direction. Living only for today with
no ability to project the future and wasting too much time arguing
over minutiae. We need a collective wake-up-call in the form of a slap
on the face. We need to start making the hard choices necessary to
clean up this library.

Python3000 was only the beginning! ONLY THE BEGINNING!

More information about the Python-list mailing list