Author serhiy.storchaka
Recipients Arfrever, benjamin.peterson, larry, r.david.murray, serhiy.storchaka
Date 2012-04-20.06:52:54
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1334904774.81.0.0673772186109.issue14626@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Before starting to code, it is necessary to solve the problem of interface.

With the majority of the functions all is good, but the `link` and `rename` have two `dirfd` parameters (even with different names). So I suggest two more alternatives.

One is the filename and dirfd are combined in a tuple. Instead of a tuple, you can specify only the name.

  link ((srcpath, srcdirfd), (dstpath, dstdirfd), *, followlinks=True)

The other -- `dirfd`s are combined in a tuple. You can specify a number, then `dirfd` is the same for both filenames.

  link (srcpath, dstpath, *, followlinks=True, dirfd=(srcdirfd, dstdirfd))

Which of these options (or the original, with different keywords) is preferable?
History
Date User Action Args
2012-04-20 06:52:54serhiy.storchakasetrecipients: + serhiy.storchaka, larry, benjamin.peterson, Arfrever, r.david.murray
2012-04-20 06:52:54serhiy.storchakasetmessageid: <1334904774.81.0.0673772186109.issue14626@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2012-04-20 06:52:54serhiy.storchakalinkissue14626 messages
2012-04-20 06:52:54serhiy.storchakacreate