On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Stephan Houben <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all, > > It seems to me that the correct algorithm to get the "full suffix" is not > to take everything after the FIRST dot, > but rather to: > 1. Recognize that the last suffix is one of the UNIX-style compression > tools .Z, .gz, ,bz2, .xz, .lzma (at least) > 2. Then add the next-to-last suffix. > > So we can then determine that the suffix of > order.for.tar.ps.gz > is .ps.gz and the basename is order.for.tar . > > However, I am not sure if we want to hard-code a list of such suffixes in > the standard library. > (Even though it could be user-extensible.) > > Stephan > Those are just examples that I encounter a lot, there can be other cases where multiple extensions are used. > > 2017-01-25 16:33 GMT+01:00 Todd <toddr...@gmail.com>: > >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Petr Viktorin <encu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 01/25/2017 04:04 PM, Todd wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:25 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull >>>> <turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp >>>> <mailto:turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm just going to let fly with the +1s and -1s, don't take them too >>>> seriously, they're basically impressionistic (I'm not a huge user of >>>> pathlib yet). >>>> >>>> Todd writes: >>>> >>>> > So although the names are tentative, perhaps there could be a >>>> "fullsuffix" >>>> > property to return the extensions as a single string, >>>> >>>> -0 '.'.join(p.suffixes) vs. p.fullsuffix? TOOWTDI says no. I >>>> also don't really see the use case. >>>> >>>> >>>> The whole point of pathlib is to provide convenience functions for >>>> common path-related operations. It is full of methods and properties >>>> that could be implemented other ways. >>>> >>>> Dealing with multi-part extensions, at least for me, is extremely >>>> common. A ".tar.gz" file is not the same as a ".tar.bz2" or a >>>> ".svg.gz". When I want to find a ".tar.gz" file, having to deal with >>>> the ".tar" and ".gz" parts separately is nothing but a nuisance. If I >>>> want to find and extract ".rar" files, I don't want ".part1.rar" files, >>>> ".part2.rar" files, and so on. So for me dealing with the extension as >>>> a single unit, rather than individual parts, is the most common >>>> approach. >>>> >>> >>> But what if the .tar.gz file is called "spam-4.2.5-final.tar.gz"? >>> Existing tools like glob and endswith() can deal with the ".tar.gz" >>> extension reliably, but "fullsuffix" would, arguably, not give the answers >>> you want. >>> >> >> >> I wouldn't use it in that situation. The existing "suffix" and "stem" >> properties also only work reliably under certain situations. >> >> >>> >>> Perhaps more specialized tools would be useful, though, for example: >>> repacked_path = original_path.replace_suffix(".tar.gz", ".zip") >>> >>> >> That is helpful if I want to rename, not if I want to (for example) >> uncompress a file. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Python-ideas mailing list >> Python-ideas@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas >> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >> > >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
