> Sorry, I don't remember who but someone proposed to add the follow_symlinks > parameter in scandir() directly. If the parameter is added to methods, > there is no such issue.
Yeah, I think having the DirEntry methods do different things depending on how scandir() was called is a really bad idea. It seems you're agreeing with this? > Again: remove any garantee about the cache in the definitions of methods, > instead copy the doc from os.path and os. Add a global remark saying that > most methods don't need any syscall in general, except for symlinks (with > follow_symlinks=True). I'm not sure I follow this -- surely it *has* to be documented that the values of DirEntry.is_X() and DirEntry.stat() are cached per entry, in contrast to os.path.isX()/os.stat()? I don't mind a global remark about not needing syscalls, but I do think it makes sense to make it explicit -- that is_X() almost never need syscalls, whereas stat() does only on POSIX but is free on Windows (except for symlinks). -Ben _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
