Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org> added the comment:
Here my first stab at a comprehensive proposal. Each section represents a
specific new function argument, and a list of functions that the argument be
added to.
All new arguments are keyword-only and optional.
All functions mentioned are in the os module.
_______________________________________
This annotation:
foo [X bar]
means "if we add this argument to function foo, we can remove function bar".
This is because bar is a new function only in trunk and has no installed base.
This annotation:
foo [- bar]
means "if we add this argument to function foo, we could theoretically start
deprecating function bar". bar shipped in a previous version of Python and we
can't simply remove it.
However! I am *not* proposing doing *any* of these deprecations--I suspect the
right thing to do is to leave all the existing functions in.
_______________________________________
follow_symlinks=bool (default True)
Allow functions to either follow symlinks (the default) or examine symlinks.
access [X faccessat]
chflags [- lchflags]
chmod [- lchmod]
chown [- lchown]
getxattr [X lgetxattr]
link [X linkat]
listxattr [X llistxattr]
removexattr [X lremovexattr]
setxattr [X lsetxattr]
stat [- lstat]
utime [X lutimes]
_______________________________________
effective_ids=bool (default False)
For functions that take the AT_EACCESS flag or otherwise operate on effective
uid/gid.
access [X faccessat]
(this also lets us skip ever adding euidaccess!)
_______________________________________
dir_fd=int (default None)
For functions that take a "dir_fd" parameter instead of / in addition to a
"path" parameter.
access [X faccessat]
chmod [X fchmodat]
chown [X fchownat]
getxattr [X fgetxattr]
link [X linkat] (note! need two parameters here.)
mkdir [X mkdirat]
mkfifo [X mkfifoat]
mknod [X mknodat]
open [X openat]
readlink [X readlinkat]
rename [X renameat]
stat [X fstatat]
symlink [X symlinkat]
unlink [X unlinkat]
utime [X futimesat utimensat]
_______________________________________
fd=int (default None)
For functions that take a "path" parameter and have an "f"-equivalent that take
an "fd" instead. The "path" parameter and "fd" parameters would be exclusive;
you must specify exactly one, never both. Both parameters would accept "None"
as equivalent to being unspecified. For the functions that only take one
parameter (chdir, listdir, stat, statvfs) I propose we give that parameter a
default of None.
chdir [- fchmod]
chown [- fchown]
execve [X fexecve]
getxattr [X fgetxattr]
listdir [X flistdir]
listxattr [X flistxattr]
removexattr [X fremovexattr]
setxattr [X fsetxattr]
stat [- fstat]
statvfs [- fstatvfs]
utime [X futimes futimens]
_______________________________________
remove_dir=bool (default False)
Allows unlink to behave like rmdir.
unlink [X unlinkat] [- rmdir]
_______________________________________
One question:
If we do as I propose, and dir_fd is always a parameter to a pre-existing
function, can we drop support for AT_FDCWD? It seems to me that
funlink("../foo", dir_fd=AT_FDCWD)
is equivalent to
unlink("../foo")
but I fear I'm missing something important.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue14626>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
