On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 02:55:56 +0200, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Both of these happen to involve pathnames that exist on > the currrently available file system, but I can easily > imagine cases where that would not be so. E.g. I might > be generating pathames to go into a tar file that will > be unpacked in a different place or on another system.
imho, it would be a good thing for a future 'file system handling module' to build more of an abstracted tree-like graph that may or may not be mappable (and may or may not be used in a particular case to actually map) to existing objects on a particular system. for example, i find it a bit in my way a lot of times that all the locators i have os.path handle for me are written according to the os, not in a unified, abstracted way. given that there are a number of applications (xml documents, file system handling, urls, archives...) that have very similar requirements, maybe there is a useful abstraction that covers these and other cases. some nitty-gritty details could be captured by suitable specializations of the general case. _w _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
