On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> However, if we *did* make such a change, it should also be made for
> operator.index as well, since that is similarly inconsistent with the
> way the int/float/etc constructor protocols work:
>
Part of this discussion seems to consider cons
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 05:35:38PM +0300, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I like consistency very much. But regarding the
> __fspath__ case, there are not that many people *writing*
> fspath-enabled classes. Instead, there are many many many more people
> *using* such classes (and dea
On 28.05.2017 18:32, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 05:35:38PM +0300, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I like consistency very much. But regarding the
__fspath__ case, there are not that many people *writing*
fspath-enabled classes. Instead, there are many many many mo
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Wolfgang Maier <
[email protected]> wrote:
> With __fspath__ being a method that can return whatever its author sees
> fit, calling str to get a path from an arbitrary object is just as wrong as
> it always was - it will work for pathlib.Path
