On 04/07/2016 08:18 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
On 7 April 2016 at 15:40, Eric Snow wrote:
On Apr 6, 2016 11:11 PM, "Raymond Hettinger" wrote:
Having worked through the API when it is first released, I find it to be
highly forgettable (i.e. I have to re-read the docs each time I've revisited
it).
Agreed, though it's arguably better than argparse, logging, unittest, or
several other stdlib modules.
Personally, the main issue I have with remembering pathlib method
names, is the inconsistency with the existing modules.
That is one of the things I really dislike. If the behaviour is the
same as the os version, it should have the same name. I also have no
problem with new names that makes more sense so long as an alias exists
for the os version (can even be deprecated without removal).
Would I change the names? I honestly don't know. If os.path was going
to disappear, then no - the inconsistency is a short term problem. But
even if there's a major switch to pathlib, I expect os.path to remain
indefinitely, and that inconsistency will be a wart that we'll have to
live with for a long time.
os.path isn't going anywhere.
--
~Ethan~
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
