On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 1:42 PM Bernardo Sulzbach < berna...@bernardosulzbach.com> wrote:
> "Serhiy and Remi objected, because it might not be obvious that the length > of the path would be the length of string." I find this _really_ > unintuitive. If anything, I would expect len(p) to be the "depth" of the > path, which doesn't make a lot of sense if it is not an absolute path. > I agree. I expect iteration, indexing, and length to refer to parts, not characters. In particular I'm a bit disappointed that `path[-1]` isn't equal to `path.name`, especially because finding `path.name` was tricky - at first I guessed path.basename (doesn't exist) and path.stem (close, but wrong). Can we implement that instead?
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/OPMOZCEKNAJ6GKKJM4S5IKO2RV6RY4XP/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
