On Fri, 20 May 2016 at 09:56 Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote:
> Let's start in 3.6 with all this. I added path to 3.4 because I didn't > realize it was in security-mode only. I've now undone all my work > there. Let's not disturb it again, not even its docs. > > I don't think there's an "upstream" repo for pathlib (like there still > is for asyncio) and I don't think there's much of a point in > supporting __fspath__ in pathlib if there's no os.fspath(). It would > only encourage hackery in apps that want to play with __fspath__. > WFM. I'll let 3.4 and 3.5 just stay as they are and make all PEP 519 changes a 3.6 thing. I'll update the implementation task list shortly. -Brett > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > > Three questions: > > > > Should pathlib gain __fspath__() all the way back to 3.4? > > Should pathlib's constructor support __fspath__() all the way back to > 3.4? > > (separate question as os.fspath() will only be in 3.6; and if we backport > > I'm not looking forward to making Typeshed happy w/o os.PathLike being > > available only in 3.6 :/) > > Should the docs from 3.4 and forward reflect the removal of the > provisional > > status? (I assume yes, but wanted to double-check) > > > > And a quick thanks to Guido for removing `path` from pathlib for me > already. > > :) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/guido%40python.org > > > > > > -- > --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) >
_______________________________________________ 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
