Skip to content

bpo-44136: pathlib: merge _Flavour.make_uri() into PurePath.as_uri()#30320

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
barneygale wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

bpo-44136: pathlib: merge _Flavour.make_uri() into PurePath.as_uri()#30320

barneygale wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@barneygale
Copy link
Contributor

@barneygalebarneygale commented Jan 1, 2022•
edited by bedevere-bot
Loading

Removes a bit of indirection.

https://bugs.python.org/issue44136

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actionsbot commented Feb 1, 2022

This PR is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.

@github-actionsgithub-actionsbot added the stale Stale PR or inactive for long period of time. label Feb 1, 2022
@barneygalebarneygale mentioned this pull request Feb 21, 2022
Closed
@brettcannonbrettcannon self-requested a review February 22, 2022 23:33
MaxwellDupre
MaxwellDupre approved these changes Feb 26, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@MaxwellDupreMaxwellDupre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks ok to me.

@brettcannon
Copy link
Member

brettcannon commented Mar 4, 2022

So why do this? I noticed as_uri() wasn't moved under PurePosixPath, so why the half move? And what's going to be gained by doing this? I know the issue mentioned potential future benefits, but I would rather make the actual change with the future benefit rather than in hopes of the benefit materializing.

Basically the code doesn't read any simpler/cleaner, and with PurePosixPath not changed I'm not finding it more readable, so it feels a bit too much like code churn without understanding the deeper motivation.

@barneygale
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

barneygale commented Mar 4, 2022

Fair enough. I'll bundle this into a larger PR that has a more tangible benefit.

@barneygalebarneygale mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2022
Closed
@barneygalebarneygalemannequin mentioned this pull request Jun 21, 2022
Closed
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@brettcannonbrettcannonAwaiting requested review from brettcannon

1 more reviewer

@MaxwellDupreMaxwellDupreMaxwellDupre approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

awaiting core reviewskip newsstaleStale PR or inactive for long period of time.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@barneygale@brettcannon@MaxwellDupre@the-knights-who-say-ni@bedevere-bot