Robert Kern wrote: > Fernando Perez wrote: > >> Perhaps this path.py could be considered for inclusion in the stdlib? I've >> only >> read the page linked above, so perhaps it can use some polishing. But it >> certainly looks like a big improvement over the scatterblast which the stdlib >> is on this particular topic. > > I'm pretty sure this has been discussed at some point. I completely > forget the results of said discussion (except the part where it wasn't > going in yet, although you can't really call that "remembering" so much > as "deducing from the current state of affairs").
It's probably one of those things which is not enough of a bother for anyone to stop and commit the effort to fix it. After all, working around the problem isn't that hard, since all the functions are there (somewhere), and their poor interfaces can typically be lived with. But the code examples in path.py really feel like a breath of (pythonic) fresh air compared to the stdlib in this regard. Care to champion it ? ;) Best, f -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
