[Python-Dev] Defining a path protocol

[Eric Snow]

On Apr 7, 2016 1:22 AM, "Georg Brandl" <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>
> On 04/06/2016 07:26 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> >  1. Name: __path__, __fspath__, or something else?
>
> __path__ is already taken as a module attribute, so I would avoid it.
> __fspath__ is fine with me, although the more explicit variants are also
> ok.  It's not like you need to read/write it constantly (that's the goal).

+1

I also think that __ospath__ may be more correct since it is an
OS-dependent representation, e.g. slash vs. backslash.

>
> >  2. Method or attribute? (changes what kind of one-liner you might use
in
> >     libraries, but I think historically all protocols have been methods
and the
> >     serialized string representation might be costly to build)
>
> An attribute would be somewhat inconsistent with the special-method
lookup rules
> (looked up on the type, not the instance), so a method is probably a
better
> choice.

I was just about to point this out.  The deviation by pickle (lookup on
instance rather than type) has been a source of pain.

>
> >  3. Built-in? (name is dependent on #1 if we add one)
>
> I don't think it warrants a builtin.  I'd place it as a function in
pathlib.

+1

>
> >  4. Add the method/attribute to str? (I assume so, much like
__index__() is on
> >     int, but I have not seen it explicitly stated so I would rather
clarify it)
>
> +1.

+1

>
> >  5. Expand the C API to have something like PyObject_Path()?
>
> +1 (with _Py_ at first) since you're going to need it in a lot of C
functions.

+1

-eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160407/53b1d9a4/attachment.html>