Rémi Lapeyre <remi.lape...@henki.fr> added the comment: > Remi: Your use case is taken care of by `len(path.parts)`.
Yes, and your use case is taken care of by `len(str(path))` which works as well. The reason in the PR is to simplify: sorted(paths, key=lambda path: len(str(path)), reverse=True) to sorted(paths, key=len, reverse=True) but why avoiding a few characters? My remark is not that it __len__ should be len(path.parts) but that the semantics are unclear (I should have wrote "**if __len__ is defined** I would expect...") Since the semantics are unclear I would except it not to be defined. Also, it's common to use a lambda or an helper function in sorted(), map(), filter(), etc. Most use case can't be covered using existing methods and shouldn't necessarely be. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue40752> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
