Thanks for your reply, that's the kind of info I was looking for to decide what to do. Good enough, I'll move on then.
Thanks -- Luis P Caamano Atlanta, GA USA On 9/29/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would recommend not using it. IMO it's an amalgam of unrelated > functionality (much like the Java equivalent BTW) and the existing os > and os.path modules work just fine. Those who disagree with me haven't > done a very good job of convincing me, so I expect this PEP to remain > in limbo indefinitely, until it is eventually withdrawn or rejected. > > --Guido > > On 9/29/06, Luis P Caamano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What's the status of PEP 355, Path - Object oriented filesystem paths? > > > > We'd like to start using the current reference implementation but we'd > > like to do it in a manner that minimizes any changes needed when Path > > becomes part of stdlib. > > > > In particular, the reference implementation in > > http://wiki.python.org/moin/PathModule names the class 'path' instead > > of 'Path', which seems like a source of name conflict problems. > > > > How would you recommend one starts using it now, as is or renaming > > class path to Path? > > > > Thanks > > > > -- > > Luis P Caamano > > Atlanta, GA USA > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/guido%40python.org > > > > > -- > --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) > _______________________________________________ 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
