Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

On 07/21/2014 03:26 PM, Victor Stinner wrote: The PEP is accepted. Thanks, Victor! Congratulations, Ben! -- ~Ethan~ ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe:

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

Modify os.listdir() to use os.scandir() is not part of the PEP, you should not do that. If you worry about performances, try to implement my free list idea. You may modify the C code of listdir() to share as much code as possible. I mean you can implement your idea in C. Victor

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

Ben Hoyt benh...@gmail.com writes: I think if I were doing this from scratch I'd reimplement listdir() in Python as return [e.name for e in scandir(path)]. ... So my basic plan is to have an internal helper function in posixmodule.c that either yields DirEntry objects or strings. And then

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

Note: listdir() accepts an integer path (an open file descriptor that refers to a directory) that is passed to fdopendir() on POSIX [4] i.e., *you can't use scandir() to replace listdir() in this case* (as I've already mentioned in [1]). See the corresponding tests from [2]. [1]

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

2014-07-22 17:52 GMT+02:00 Ben Hoyt benh...@gmail.com: However, given that we have to support this for listdir() anyway, I think it's worth reconsidering whether scandir()'s directory argument can be an integer FD. Given that listdir() already supports it, it will almost certainly be asked for

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

On 23 Jul 2014 02:18, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-07-22 17:52 GMT+02:00 Ben Hoyt benh...@gmail.com: However, given that we have to support this for listdir() anyway, I think it's worth reconsidering whether scandir()'s directory argument can be an integer FD. Given

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

Makes sense, thanks. -Ben On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 Jul 2014 02:18, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-07-22 17:52 GMT+02:00 Ben Hoyt benh...@gmail.com: However, given that we have to support this for listdir() anyway, I

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

2014-07-22 4:27 GMT+02:00 Ben Hoyt benh...@gmail.com: The PEP is accepted. Superb. Could you please update the PEP with the Resolution and BDFL-Delegate fields? Done. Victor ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

Ben Hoyt benh...@gmail.com writes: Note: listdir() accepts an integer path (an open file descriptor that refers to a directory) that is passed to fdopendir() on POSIX [4] i.e., *you can't use scandir() to replace listdir() in this case* (as I've already mentioned in [1]). See the

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

Le 21/07/2014 18:26, Victor Stinner a écrit : I'm happy because the final API is very close to os.path functions and pathlib.Path methods. Python stays consistent, which is a great power of this language! By the way, http://bugs.python.org/issue19767 could benefit too. Regards Antoine.

[Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

Hi, I asked privately Guido van Rossum if I can be the BDFL-delegate for the PEP 471 and he agreed. I accept the latest version of the PEP: http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0471/ I consider that the PEP 471 scandir was discussed enough to collect all possible options (variations of the

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 471 scandir accepted

I asked privately Guido van Rossum if I can be the BDFL-delegate for the PEP 471 and he agreed. I accept the latest version of the PEP: http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0471/ Thank you! The PEP also explicitly mentions that os.walk() will be modified to benefit of the new