On 25 Nov 2013 13:18, "Ben Hoyt" <benh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The idea of the rich stat result object is that has all that info > > prepopulated, based on an initial stat call. "Caching" it amounts to "keep a > > reference to it". > > > > It is suggested that it would be a subset of the pathlib.Path API: > > http://bugs.python.org/issue19725 > > > > If it's also a superset of the existing stat object API, then at least > > Path.stat and Path.lstat (and perhaps the lower level APIs) can be updated > > to return it in 3.5. > > Got it. > > >> "Worst case", we can add os.scandir() separately, which return > >> DirEntry, "path-like" objects. > > > > Indeed, we may still want such an object API, since dirent doesn't provide > > full stat info. > > I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting here. > > In any case, I'm going to modify my scandir() so its DirEntry objects > are closer to pathlib.Path, particularly: > > * isdir() -> is_dir() > * isfile() -> is_file() > * islink() -> is_symlink() > * add is_socket(), is_fifo(), is_block_device(), and is_char_device() > > I'm considering removing DirEntry's .dirent attribute entirely. The > above is_* functions cover everything in .dirent.d_type in a much more > Pythonic and cross-platform way, and the only other info in .dirent is > d_ino -- can a non-Windows dev tell me how or when d_ino would be > useful? If it's useful, is it useful in a higher-level, cross-platform > API such as scandir()? > > Hmmm, I wonder about this "rich stat object" idea in light of the > above. Do the methods on pathlib.Path basically supercede the need for > this? Because otherwise folks will always be wondering whether to say > "path.is_dir()" or "path.stat().is_dir" ... two ways to do it, right > next to each other. So I'd prefer to add the "rich" stuff on the > higher-level Path instead of the lower-level stat.
The rich stat API proposal exists precisely to provide a clean way to do stat result caching - path objects always give immediate data, stat objects give cached answers. The direct APIs on Path would just become a trivial shortcut once a rich stat APIs existed - you could use the long form if you wanted to, but it would be pointless to do so. Cheers, Nick.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
