Eli Bendersky <eli...@gmail.com> added the comment:
>> IOW, globbing is usually understood as the act of expanding a pattern
>> to the files it matches. Nothing in that implies recursive traversal
>> of a directory tree.
>
> Still, that's a common need. "I want all Python files in a subtree".
>
>> On the other hand, os.walk and/or walkdir suggest that in their name.
>
> I don't know why "walk" is supposedly more recursive than "glob".
Google "walk directory". First hit is a Rosetta code page with
*recursive* walking implemented in various languages. So I guess it
does have this connotation. Regardless, os.walk has been in Python for
ages, and it's always been the go-to tool for recursive traversal.
walkdir's name suggests the same.
>
>> Admittedly, we already have more than one, and a high-level tool is
>> proposed with Nick's walkdir. Why add *yet another* high-level tool?
>
> Because the walkdir spelling (IIUC) is longish, tedious and awkward.
> I could see myself typing "rglob('*.py')" in a short script or an
> interpreter session, without having to look up any kind of docs.
> Certainly not the walkdir alternative (I've already forgotten what it
> is).
walkdir is a new module proposal. If its API is tedious and awkward,
it should probably be improved *now* while it's in development. Adding
yet another tool that implements part of its functionality, winning a
golf tournament along the way, isn't the solution, IMHO.
----------
title: Support recursive globs -> Add a recursive function to the glob package
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue13968>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
