Actually I'm thinking this duck may only have a beak. Instead of a bunch of
fields of None I'd prefer just not having that attribute defined on the
object. I consider the os specific "stat-like" info from reading a
directory to be so os specific that i'd rather not let someone be confused
by it if it were to be returned up to a higher level caller. It's not a
stat.
On May 6, 2013 2:36 AM, "Charles-François Natali" <report@bugs.python.org>
wrote:

>
> Charles-François Natali added the comment:
>
> > I don't think that's true in general, or true of how other Python APIs
> work. For instance, many APIs return a "file-like object", and you can only
> do certain things on that object, depending on what the documentation says,
> or what EAFP gets you. Some file-like object don't support seek/tell, some
> don't support close, etc. I've seen plenty of walk-like-a-duck checks like
> this:
>
> Yes, I'm fully aware duck-typing ;-)
> But here, you're saying that "a duck has a beak, but it *may* have
> legs, a tail, etc".
> It's just looks wrong to me on so many levels.
>
> Please bring this up on python-dev.
>
> ----------
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11406>
> _______________________________________
>