[Python-Dev] Maybe, just maybe, pathlib doesn't belong.

[Paul Moore]

On 11 April 2016 at 22:21, Sven R. Kunze <srkunze at mail.de> wrote:
> On 11.04.2016 23:08, Random832 wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016, at 17:04, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
>>>
>>> PS: The only way out that I can imagine is to fix pathlib. I am not in
>>> favor of fixing functions of "os" and "os.path" to except "path"
>>> objects;
>>
>> Why not?
>
>
> It occurred to me after pondering over Paul's comments.
>
> "os" and "os.path" is just a completely different level of abstraction.
> There is just no need to mess with them.
>
> The initial failure of my colleague and me of using pathlib can be solely
> attributed to pathlib's lack of functionality. Not to the incompatibility of
> "os" nor "os.path" with "Path" objects.

As your thoughts appear to have been triggered by my comments, I feel
I should clarify.

1. I like pathlib even as it is right now, and I'm strongly -1 on removing it.
2. The "external dependency" aspect of 3rd party solutions makes them
far less useful to me.
3. The work on improving integration with the stdlib (which is nearly
sorted now, as far as I can see) is a big improvement, and I'm all in
favour. But even without it, I wouldn't want pathlib to be removed.
4. There are further improvements that could be made to pathlib,
certainly, but again they are optional, and pathlib is fine without
them.
5. I wish more 3rd party code integrated better with pathlib. The
improved integration work might help with this. But ultimately, Python
2 compatibility is likely to be the biggest block (either perceived or
real - we can make pathlib support as simple as possible, but some 3rd
party authors will remain unwilling to add support for Python 3 only
features in the short term). This isn't a pathlib problem.
6. There will probably always be a place for low-level os/os.path
code. Adding support in those modules for pathlib doesn't affect that
fact, but does make it easier to use pathlib "seamlessly", so why not
do so?

tl; dr; I'm 100% in favour of pathlib, and in the direction the
current discussion (excluding "let's give up on pathlib" digressions)
is going.

Paul