Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > > > Another question: What is the real purpose of pure paths? One thing I > > > see is using them to, say, manipulate Windows paths on a Posix machine > > > for some reason. > > > > Yes. Also, if some reason you want to be sure you're only doing path > > computations, not I/O. > > > > "Sure" in what sense, like accidentally? IIUC path > manipulation/computation operations don't really call into the OS - > only some methods do.
Yes, I was including the methods inside "computations". > I mean, having Path, WindowsPath and PosixPath without the pure > counterparts. You usually use Path, but say you want to manipulate Windows > paths on a Linux box. So you instantiate a WindowsPath explicitly and do > your thing on it. You can't (NotImplementedError) call any methods that > would call into the OS, and that's it. That would have been a possibility, but I find having distinct classes much cleaner than raising NotImplementedError in many places. It's also self-documenting about which operations are "pure" and which operations are not. > I'm just trying to look at the module from the POV of someone who sees it > for the first time, wondering "why do I have two kinds of things here, and > when would I want to use each? could I just use Path 99.9% of the time and > forget about the other options?". If that's true, we may want to reflect it > in the documentation explicitly - I believe this will make the module > easier to understand. Well, at the beginning of the doc there's: """The main point of entry is the Path class, which will instantiate a concrete path for the current platform.""", and the "basic use" section only uses the Path class. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue19673> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
