> -1. On UNIX, character data is not sufficient to represent paths. We
> must, must, must continue to have a simple bytes interface to these
> APIs.
I'd like to respond to this concern in three ways:
1. The PEP doesn't remove any of the existing interfaces. So if the
interfaces for byte-oriented file names in 3.0 work fine for you,
feel free to continue to use them.
2. Even if they were taken away (which the PEP does not propose to do),
it would be easy to emulate them for applications that want them.
For example, listdir could be wrapped as
def listdir_b(bytestring):
fse = sys.getfilesystemencoding()
string = bytestring.decode(fse, "python-escape")
for fn in os.listdir(string):
yield fn.encoded(fse, "python-escape")
3. I still disagree that we must, must, must continue to provide these
interfaces. I don't understand from the rest of your message what
would *actually* break if people would use the proposed interfaces.
Regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
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
