On Aug 1, 3:19 am, Teemu Likonen <tliko...@iki.fi> wrote: > * 2011-07-30T10:57:29+10:00 * Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > > Teemu Likonen wrote: > >> Pathnames and the separator for pathname components should be > >> abstracted away, to a pathname object. > > > Been there, done that, floundered on the inability of people to work > > out the details. > > >http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0355/ > > I'm very much a Lisp person and obviously got the idea of pathname > objects from Common Lisp. Lazily I'm also learning Python too but at the > moment I can't comment on the details of that PEP. Yet, generally I > think that's the way to improve pathnames, not the "rantinrick's".
This thread was intended to expose another PyWart and get the community juices flowing. os.path is broken and cannot be repaired because os.path was an improper API to begin with. The only way to solve this problem is to introduce a new Path object. A new Path object is the answer. Some have said "been there, done that" with a sarcastic and defeatist point of view. I say we need to re-visit the proposal of PEP-0355 and hash out something quickly. We also need to realize that one day or another this Path object is going to become reality and the longer we drag our feet getting it implemented the more painful the transition is going to be. I feel Python community is in an awkward teenage stage at this point not really sure of it's self or direction. Living only for today with no ability to project the future and wasting too much time arguing over minutiae. We need a collective wake-up-call in the form of a slap on the face. We need to start making the hard choices necessary to clean up this library. Python3000 was only the beginning! ONLY THE BEGINNING! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
