2013/11/25 Greg Ewing :
> Ben Hoyt wrote:
>>
>> However, it seems there was no further discussion about why not
>> "extension" and "extensions"? I have never heard a filename extension
>> being called a "suffix".
>
>
> You can't have read many unix man pages, then! I just
> searched for "suffix" in
25.11.13 01:35, Nick Coghlan написав(ла):
Using "**" for directory spanning globs is also another case of us
borrowing a reasonably common idiom from *nix systems that may not be
familiar to Windows users.
Rather from Java world.
___
Python-Dev mail
On 25 Nov 2013 09:42, "Ben Hoyt" wrote:
>
> > Using "**" for directory spanning globs is also another case of us
borrowing
> > a reasonably common idiom from *nix systems that may not be familiar to
> > Windows users.
>
> Okay, *nix wins then. :-) Python's stdlib is already fairly
> *nix-oriented
> Using "**" for directory spanning globs is also another case of us borrowing
> a reasonably common idiom from *nix systems that may not be familiar to
> Windows users.
Okay, *nix wins then. :-) Python's stdlib is already fairly
*nix-oriented (even when it's being cross-platform), so I guess it's
On 25 Nov 2013 09:14, "Ben Hoyt" wrote:
>
> >> 4) Is path_obj.glob() recursive? In the PEP it looks like it is if the
> >> pattern starts with '**',
> >
> >
> > I don't think it has to *start* with **. Rather, the ** is
> > a pattern that can span directory separators. It's not a
> > flag that app
>> However, it seems there was no further discussion about why not
>> "extension" and "extensions"? I have never heard a filename extension
>> being called a "suffix".
>
>
> You can't have read many unix man pages, then!
Huh, no I haven't! Certainly not regularly, as I'm almost exclusively
a Windo
Ben Hoyt wrote:
However, it seems there was no further discussion about why not
"extension" and "extensions"? I have never heard a filename extension
being called a "suffix".
You can't have read many unix man pages, then! I just
searched for "suffix" in the gcc man page, and found
this:
Fo
> Well, "path" is much too common already, and it's an obvious variable
> name for a filesystem path, so "pathlib" is better to avoid name
> clashes.
Yep, that makes total sense, thanks.
>> However, it seems there was no further discussion about why not
>> "extension" and "extensions"? I have nev
Hello,
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 11:00:09 +1300
Ben Hoyt wrote:
>
> 1) Someone on reddit.com/r/Python asked "Is the import going to be
> 'pathlib'? I thought the renaming going on of std lib things with the
> transition to Python 3 sought to remove the spurious usage of
> appending 'lib' to libs?" I
PEP 428 looks nice. Thanks, Antoine!
I have a couple of questions about the module name and API. I think
I've read through most of the previous discussion, but may have missed
some, so please point me to the right place if there have already been
discussions about these things.
1) Someone on redd
10 matches
Mail list logo
