On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 06:19:52PM -0500, Jason Orendorff wrote: > To say "paths aren't strings" is all very well, and in a very abstract > sense I almost agree--but you have to admit it sort of flies in the face > of, you know, reality. Filesystem paths are in fact strings on all > operating systems I'm aware of. And it's no accident or performance > optimization. It's good design.
The question isn't whether Path objects should *act* like strings. I haven't seen anyone argue that they shouldn't, except for a few specific aspects, like iteration, and those are argued on both sides of the subclassing camp. The question is whether they should be actual subclasses of the Python string type. As for what platforms do, if we want to stick to the platform handling of paths, we change nothing. That's apparently not what people want ;) -- Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread! _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
