>> Personally, the main issue I have with remembering pathlib method >> names, is the inconsistency with the existing modules.
Was this *really* not brought up when this was introduced? Oh well. We could add aliases, but I think it's not such a big deal. I'm convinced that the largest barrier to adoption has been that it can't be used with the stdlib. And I think the discussion on Python-ideas supports that. That, and py2 compatibility. There is a back port on PyPi, but it can't be used with the stdlib, either. Not sure what to do about that--maybe it should inherit from Unicode? -CHB > 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/chris.barker%40noaa.gov _______________________________________________ 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
