Author eli.bendersky
Recipients eli.bendersky, eric.araujo, giampaolo.rodola, ncoghlan, pitrou, ubershmekel
Date 2012-02-08.15:59:22
SpamBayes Score 4.03727e-12
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <CAF-Rda9m-JMvX-5K_kJawANh-rLL3+tTi81eP_zEzeL7jhFEKQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1328716158.3387.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Content
>> IOW, globbing is usually understood as the act of expanding a pattern
>> to the files it matches. Nothing in that implies recursive traversal
>> of a directory tree.
>
> Still, that's a common need. "I want all Python files in a subtree".
>
>> On the other hand, os.walk and/or walkdir suggest that in their name.
>
> I don't know why "walk" is supposedly more recursive than "glob".

Google "walk directory". First hit is a Rosetta code page with
*recursive* walking implemented in various languages. So I guess it
does have this connotation. Regardless, os.walk has been in Python for
ages, and it's always been the go-to tool for recursive traversal.
walkdir's name suggests the same.

>
>> Admittedly, we already have more than one, and a high-level tool is
>> proposed with Nick's walkdir. Why add *yet another* high-level tool?
>
> Because the walkdir spelling (IIUC) is longish, tedious and awkward.
> I could see myself typing "rglob('*.py')" in a short script or an
> interpreter session, without having to look up any kind of docs.
> Certainly not the walkdir alternative (I've already forgotten what it
> is).

walkdir is a new module proposal. If its API is tedious and awkward,
it should probably be improved *now* while it's in development. Adding
yet another tool that implements part of its functionality, winning a
golf tournament along the way, isn't the solution, IMHO.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-02-08 15:59:23eli.benderskysetrecipients: + eli.bendersky, ncoghlan, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, eric.araujo, ubershmekel
2012-02-08 15:59:23eli.benderskylinkissue13968 messages
2012-02-08 15:59:22eli.benderskycreate