On 9/30/19 4:28 AM, Barry Scott wrote:
On 30 Sep 2019, at 05:40, DL Neil via Python-list <python-list@python.org>
wrote:
Should pathlib reflect changes it has made to the file-system?
I think it should not.
A Path() is the name of a file it is not the file itself. Why should it
track changes in the file system for the name?
I would have said the same thing, but the docs⁰ disagree: a
PurePath represents the name of (or the path to) a file, but a
Path represents the actual file.
That said, why doesn't your argument apply to read and write? I
would certainly expect that writing to a path and then reading
from that same path would return the newly written data. If I
squint funny, the Path object is tracking the operations on the
file system.
I think I'm actually arguing against some long since made (and
forgotten?) design decisions that can't be changed (dare I say
fixed?) because changing them would break backwards
compatibility.
Yuck. :-) And I can absolutely see all sorts of different
expecations not being met and having to be explained by saying
"well, that's the way it works."
⁰ https://docs.python.org/3/library/pathlib.html
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
