Re: Jason Orendorff's path module
andybak wrote: > Which rather makes me wonder - lot's of people liked this module > or rather disliked os.path. Is there anything salvageable from > the BDFL's objections worthy of a PEP? Funny you should bring this up today.. I was just thinking the same thing (-: and I looked at the pep (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/ pep-0355/) and the final (pep) version of the path module, which is at http://wiki.python.org/moin/PathModule If the primary issue that killed this pep was due to inheritance from the str type, i.e. the fact that a lot of unnecessary string functions would be inherited into an already functionally-fat path class, then perhaps that problem had to be addressed first, as it would probably crop up in other areas. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I presume ABCs (abstract base classes) were intended to help in such cases? AK -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Jason Orendorff's path module
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 03:41:46 -0700, andybak wrote: > I know this has been consigned to oblivion by the BDFL but I'm rather > addicted to it's use. I notice the original site is no longer there. Has > anyone got a cached copy of the page that I can host for posterity? You can download a copy from the Python package index: pypi.python.org Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Jason Orendorff's path module
Hi, I know this has been consigned to oblivion by the BDFL but I'm rather addicted to it's use. I notice the original site is no longer there. Has anyone got a cached copy of the page that I can host for posterity? Which rather makes me wonder - lot's of people liked this module or rather disliked os.path. Is there anything salvageable from the BDFL's objections worthy of a PEP? Andy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
