Joonas Liik writes: > then it might be an acceptable compromise to have yet another...
"There should be one-- and preferably only one -- obvious way to do it." The obvious way is to use the existing stdlib modules. So.... > package that just imports os, pathlib, shutil etc and re-exports > all relevant functions. Anybody wanting this can easily do a better job than the stdlib ever can do -- by writing a package including all the modules they frequently use and only re-exporting those names that they use, perhaps with shorter or personally mnemonic aliases (Windows vs. Unix nomenclature for many shell utilities, for example -- but watch those builtins like "dir"!) Of course, this is horrible programming practice, making for burdens on reviewers and maintainers. I see the convenience for writing one-off scripts and perhaps a personal library, but I don't see it as a core function of the language and its standard library. So, -1 in the stdlib, and +0 for a base module on PyPI that demonstrates the principle and individual users could modify to personal taste. Steve _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
