Richard Cooper added the comment: Pull Request (PR 1649) treats this as a documentation problem. I would argue that the documentation is correct and this is a bug in the code.
The `strict` flag was added as a result of issue19717. The decision on what to do when strict=False seems to come in https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2016-September/042203.html where Guido says: "I would prefer it if Path.resolve() resolved symlinks until it hits something that doesn't exist and then just keep the rest of the path unchanged." The documented behaviour also seems much more useful than the current behaviour. ---------- nosy: +richardc _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue30177> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
