[Python-Dev] pathlib - current status of discussions
Ethan Furman
ethan at stoneleaf.us
Thu Apr 14 12:46:13 EDT 2016
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Thu Apr 14 12:46:13 EDT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] pathlib - current status of discussions
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] pathlib - current status of discussions
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 04/14/2016 08:59 AM, Michael Mysinger via Python-Dev wrote: > I am saying that if os.path.join now accepts RichPath objects, and those > objects can return either str or bytes, then its much harder to reason about > when I have all bytes or all strings. In essence, you will force me to pre- > wrap all RichPath objects in either os.fsencode(os.fspath(path)) or > os.fsdecode(os.fspath(path)), just so I can reason about the type. And if I > have to always do that wrapping then os.path.join doesn't need to accept > RichPath objects and call fspath at all. What many folks seem to be missing is that *you* (generic you) have control of your data. If you are not working at the bytes layer, you shouldn't be getting bytes objects because: - you specified str when asking for data from the OS, or - you transformed the incoming bytes from whatever external source to str when you received them. -- ~Ethan~
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] pathlib - current status of discussions
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] pathlib - current status of discussions
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list