On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Sven R. Kunze <srku...@mail.de> wrote: > 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. >
This issue is coupled with the future optimization questions. > 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? > Taking into account the description (and the drafted type hint), which the documentation will probably reflect, the semantic effects of that are very minor or nonexistent. I do think the documentation of the protocol should say that str or bytes subclasses should not implement __fspath__. So no API inconsistency there. -- Koos _______________________________________________ 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
