Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote:
Why in the world do the os.path functions need to work with Path
objects?
So that applications using path objects can pass them
to library code that uses os.path to manipulate them.
I'm confused about what a bytes path IS -- is it encoded?
It's a sequence of bytes identifying a file. Often it
will be an encoding of som piece of text in the file
system encoding, but there's no guarantee of that.
Can you assume it can be decoded ?
Only if you use an encoding in which all byte sequences
are valid, such as latin1 or utf8+surrogateescape.
So the ONLY thing
you should do with it is pass it along to another low level system
call.
Not quite -- you can separate it into components and
work with them. Essentially the same set of operations
that os.path provides.
- the names would be fspath and __fspath__, since the result may be
either a path name as text, or an encoded path name as bytes
I like __pathname__ better because this entire effort is because we'
be decided itMs important to make the distinction between a "path" and
the text representation of said path.
I agree -- the term "pathname" can cover both text and
bytes. When posix talks about pathnames it's really
talking about bytes.
--
Greg
_______________________________________________
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
