Python version: Python 3.8.1 (tags/v3.8.1:1b293b6, Dec 18 2019, 23:11:46) [MSC v.1916 64 bit (AMD64)] on win32

The usage of symlink_to() is link.symlink_to(target)
while the usage of link_to() is target.link_to(link).
This could be confusing.

Here is an example:

>>> import pathlib
>>> target = pathlib.Path('target.txt')
>>> p1 = pathlib.Path('symlink.txt')
>>> p2 = pathlib.Path('hardlink.txt')
>>> p1.symlink_to(target)
>>> p2.link_to(target)  # expected usage
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
  File "D:\Program Files\Python38\lib\pathlib.py", line 1346, in link_to
    self._accessor.link_to(self, target)
FileNotFoundError: [WinError 2] The system cannot find the file specified: 'hardlink.txt' -> 'target.txt'
>>> target.link_to(p2)  # current usage
>>>

Since os.symlink() and os.link() have the same argument order,

>>> import os
>>> os.symlink('target.txt', 'symlink.txt')
>>> os.link('target.txt', 'hardlink.txt')
>>>

it would be nicer if the pathlib has the same argument order too.

Ahah. Nice catch!

Well, it's a pity this got overlooked when we added Path.link_to().  But I'm afraid it's late to change it now, since this has been released, and changing the argument order would break existing code in potentially dangerous ways.

Note the original issue where this was added was issue26978.

Closing as won't fix.  If you feel strongly about this, I would suggest to bring the discussion on python-dev: https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/

Per discussion on the mailing list, I'd like to request that this bug be re-opened.

https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/thread/7QPLYW36ZK6QTW4SV4FI6C343KYWCPAT/

Am hesitant on re-opening this.

I think it sounds more meaningful to open a new issue for the new
suggestion that requires deprecating this
current behavior and introducing the new intended functionality.

Best,
Joannah

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 8:40 PM Barney Gale <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:

>
> Barney Gale <barney.gale@gmail.com> added the comment:
>
> Per discussion on the mailing list, I'd like to request that this bug be
> re-opened.
>
>
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/thread/7QPLYW36ZK6QTW4SV4FI6C343KYWCPAT/
>
> ----------
> nosy: +barneygale
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <https://bugs.python.org/issue39291>
> _______________________________________
>

-- 
Best,
Joannah Nanjekye

*"You think you know when you learn, are more sure when you can write, even
more when you can teach, but certain when you can program." Alan J. Perlis*

one option to could be to create a hardlink_to() method which is link.hardlink_to(target) and in a few release, deprecate link_to ? :)