RE: [path-PEP] Path inherits from basestring again

> Yes, I read and understood it. Saying "Don't read this if
> you don't want to be offended" doesn't make an offensive
> statement inoffensive.

No, but it makes complaining that it was offensive pointless.

> I grant that Python is much easier to learn than other
> programming languages; students can pick up the basics
> rapidly. Once the basics are mastered and mentoring is over,
> reliance on guess and intuition is not a substitute for
> documentation, or for reading the code if documentation is
> not available.

Working with paths *is* the basics, especially since another strength of
Python is as a form of shell script.

> However, if
> the intention here is to create something different from
> Jason's original module, create something different and call
> it by another name than path; don't attempt to guess "what
> Jason really meant." It is not Pythonic to guess.

I believe the intent here is to add an OO path object to the standard
library. If the intent was to add Jason's path module to the standard
library, then there would be no room for discussion about how it was. No
doubt Reinhold can clarify the intent here. Certainly there will be times
when what is suitable for a third-party module is not suitable for a
standard library module.

=Tony.Meyer
Received on Thu Sep 29 17:18:36 2005