On 18 March 2018 at 14:44, Barry Scott <ba...@barrys-emacs.org> wrote: > It seems that the main quest to answer first is this. > > Should Path() have methods to access all file operations?
No, (Counterexample, having a Path operation to set Windows ACLs for a path). > Maybe it was a mistake to add the ones that are already there. Seems unlikely, as Path objects are pretty useful in their current form. Even if it were, in some cases, backward compatibility dictates keeping them so who cares? > Especially in light of the fspath protocol that now exists. Again, *maybe* the arguments for some of the existing methods were weakened by the existence of the fspath protocol, but not enough to override backward compatibility, so who cares? > If yes proceed to details the methods and their semantics. Not applicable, see above. > If no then concentrate on making shutil etc easy to use this Path() args. Wrong conclusion - just because it shouldn't have methods for *all* doesn't imply that *nothing* new warrants being a Path method. Just that cases should be considered on their individual merits. > Maybe do this anyway. Certainly this is a reasonable thing to propose, Probably doesn't even need much discussion, an issue on bpo should be sufficient. Paul _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
