On 13.05.2016 10:36, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
This has just been discussed very recently in this thread (and earlier
too).
Could you point me to that? It seems I missed that part. I only found
posts related to performance degradation.
However, the proposed semantics will change if the checks are swapped.
So, my actual question is:
Is that an intended API inconsistency or a known bug supposed to be
resolved later?
It may make sense, but it's not among our current worries.
It might not be yours but mine. ;) That's why I was asking.
Besides, we already added the new fspath semantics to the PEP.
While I hope Brett is asleep in his time zone, I'm guessing he will
agree (just saying this because you write "@Brett").
-- Koos
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Sven R. Kunze <srku...@mail.de> wrote:
On 12.05.2016 18:24, Guido van Rossum wrote:
def fspath(p: Union[str, bytes, PathLike]) -> Union[str, bytes]:
if isinstance(p, (str, bytes)):
return p
try:
return p.__fspath__
except AttributeError:
raise TypeError(...)
@Brett
Would you think it makes sense to swap the str/bytes check and the
__fspath__ check?
I just thought of a class subclassing str/bytes and defines __fspath__. Its
__fspath__ method would be ignored currently.
Best,
Sven
_______________________________________________
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/k7hoven%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________
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
