Direct sub-classing of pathlib.Path

[projetmbc]

BPO	24132
Nosy	@pfmoore, @pitrou, @keithy, @qb-cea, @miss-islington, @FFY00, @barneygale, @Xtrem532, @nyuszika7h, @kfollstad
PRs	bpo-24132: refactor pathlib to allow easy subclassing #6248 bpo-40107: stop using os.open() to implement pathlib.Path.open() #25240 bpo-42998: add 'user' parameter to pathlib.Path.home() #25271 bpo-43012: remove pathlib._Accessor #25701 bpo-44136: remove pathlib._Flavour #26141 bpo-24132: Direct sub-classing of pathlib.Path #26438 bpo-44412: add os.path.fileuri() function. #26708 bpo-24132: Add direct subclassing of PurePath/Path in pathlib #26906 bpo-24132: Add pathlib._AbstractPath #31085 gh-68320, gh-88302 - Allow for pathlib.Path subclassing #31691

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = None
created_at = <Date 2015-05-06.05:26:53.017>
labels = ['type-feature', 'library', '3.11']
title = 'Direct sub-classing of pathlib.Path'
updated_at = <Date 2022-03-09.23:54:09.299>
user = 'https://bugs.python.org/projetmbc'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2022-03-09.23:54:09.299>
actor = 'barneygale'
assignee = 'none'
closed = False
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2015-05-06.05:26:53.017>
creator = 'projetmbc'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 24132
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 28.0
messages = ['242643', '242651', '242656', '242657', '242689', '242696', '242699', '242700', '242701', '242702', '242703', '242705', '246007', '305799', '305811', '305827', '305830', '305918', '310634', '314561', '314582', '314625', '365277', '381321', '392695', '401946', '412354', '414821']
nosy_count = 15.0
nosy_names = ['paul.moore', 'pitrou', 'bronger', 'elguavas', 'piotr.dobrogost', 'Kevin.Norris', 'projetmbc', 'keithy', 'qb-cea', 'miss-islington', 'FFY00', 'barneygale', 'Xtrem532', 'nyuszika7h', 'kfollstad']
pr_nums = ['6248', '25240', '25271', '25701', '26141', '26438', '26708', '26906', '31085', '31691']
priority = 'normal'
resolution = None
stage = 'patch review'
status = 'open'
superseder = None
type = 'enhancement'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue24132'
versions = ['Python 3.11']

[projetmbc]

Hello.

I have noticed a problem with the following code.

from pathlib import Path

class PPath(Path):
    def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
        super().__init__(*args, **kwargs)

test = PPath("dir", "test.txt")

This gives the following error message.

 
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Users/projetmbc/test.py", line 14, in <module>
    test = PPath("dir", "test.txt")
  File "/anaconda/lib/python3.4/pathlib.py", line 907, in __new__
    self = cls._from_parts(args, init=False)
  File "/anaconda/lib/python3.4/pathlib.py", line 589, in _from_parts
    drv, root, parts = self._parse_args(args)
  File "/anaconda/lib/python3.4/pathlib.py", line 582, in _parse_args
    return cls._flavour.parse_parts(parts)
AttributeError: type object 'PPath' has no attribute '_flavour'

This breaks the sub-classing from Python point of view.

There is an ugly hack to sub-class Path but it's a bit unpythonic.

[pfmoore]

One issue with your code - what would you expect str(test) to produce? "dir/test.txt" or "dir\test.txt"? That's the point of the "flavour" - is it a Windows path or a Unix path?

Agreed that an easier method of creating Path subclasses that handle this type of thing would be useful, but any solution needs to make sure that developers don't overlook the Windows vs Unix implications.

Can you give an actual use case (as opposed to the toy example)?

[pitrou]

The Path classes were not designed to be subclassable by the user.
I'm not against making subclassing easier, but someone will have to propose a viable approach for that.

[projetmbc]

Hello.

I will give a real example in 5 hours after my job. I will try tomorrow a
solution to ease the subclassing using another dedicazted class PathPlus,
sorry for the name. The idea would be to use this new class for
customization, and also to define WindowsPath and PosixPath sub-classing
this new class. By default PathPlus would be an empty class. I do not know
if this works well. Maybe my idea is a bad one.

*Christophe BAL*
*Enseignant de mathématiques en Lycée **et développeur Python amateur*
*---*
*French math teacher in a "Lycée" **and **Python **amateur developer*

2015-05-06 13:05 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou <report@bugs.python.org>:

Antoine Pitrou added the comment:

The Path classes were not designed to be subclassable by the user.
I'm not against making subclassing easier, but someone will have to
propose a viable approach for that.

----------
versions: +Python 3.5 -Python 3.4

---

Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24132\>

---

[projetmbc]

Here are for example two extra methods that I have implemented.

def __sub__(cls, path):
    """
This magic method allows to use ``onepath - anotherpath`` instead of the
long
version ``onepath.relative_to(anotherpath)`` given by ``pathlib.Path``.
    """
    return cls.relative_to(path)

def _ppath_common_with(cls, paths):
    """
This method returns the path of the smaller common "folder" of the current
path
and at least one paths.

python::
from mistool import os_use

    path   = os_use.PPath("/Users/projects/source/doc")
    path_1 = os_use.PPath("/Users/projects/README")
    path_2 = os_use.PPath("/Users/projects/source/misTool/os_use.py")

    print(path.common_with((path_1, path_2)))
    """
    if not isinstance(paths, (list, tuple)):
        paths = [paths]

    commonparts = list(cls.parts)

    for onepath in paths:
        i = 0

        for common, actual in zip(commonparts, onepath.parts):
            if common == actual:
                i += 1
            else:
                break

        commonparts = commonparts[:i]

        if not commonparts:
            break

    commonpath = pathlib.Path("")

    for part in commonparts:
        commonpath /= part

    return commonpath

*Christophe BAL*
*Enseignant de mathématiques en Lycée **et développeur Python amateur*
*---*
*French math teacher in a "Lycée" **and **Python **amateur developer*

2015-05-06 14:13 GMT+02:00 Christophe BAL <report@bugs.python.org>:

Christophe BAL added the comment:

Hello.

I will give a real example in 5 hours after my job. I will try tomorrow a
solution to ease the subclassing using another dedicazted class PathPlus,
sorry for the name. The idea would be to use this new class for
customization, and also to define WindowsPath and PosixPath sub-classing
this new class. By default PathPlus would be an empty class. I do not know
if this works well. Maybe my idea is a bad one.

*Christophe BAL*
*Enseignant de mathématiques en Lycée **et développeur Python amateur*
*---*
*French math teacher in a "Lycée" **and **Python **amateur developer*

2015-05-06 13:05 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou <report@bugs.python.org>:

>
> Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
>
> The Path classes were not designed to be subclassable by the user.
> I'm not against making subclassing easier, but someone will have to
> propose a viable approach for that.
>
> ----------
> versions: +Python 3.5 -Python 3.4
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue24132\>
> _______________________________________
>

----------

---

Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24132\>

---

[pfmoore]

For that type of function, I'd suggest you use a standalone function rather than subclassing and methods or operator overloading. You don't gain enough to be worth the complexity of having to subclass path objects. And duck typing means that your function works for any subclass of (Pure)Path without change.

[projetmbc]

I don't agree with you. I prefer to add new functionalities to the paths I
use. This is the power of OOP. It is easier and cleaner to use
*mypath.common_with(otherpath)* than *common_with(*mypath, **other path)
.

Python is highly OOP, so you can't say *"don't use subclassing in your
case"*. As a user, I should have the possibility to use the method I want.

Another example is the use of *onepath - anotherpath* instead of
*onepath.relative_to(*another path) . That's the power of the magic
method to add this kind of feature.

*Christophe BAL*
*Enseignant de mathématiques en Lycée **et développeur Python amateur*
*---*
*French math teacher in a "Lycée" **and **Python **amateur developer*

2015-05-06 20:21 GMT+02:00 Paul Moore <report@bugs.python.org>:

Paul Moore added the comment:

For that type of function, I'd suggest you use a standalone function
rather than subclassing and methods or operator overloading. You don't gain
enough to be worth the complexity of having to subclass path objects. And
duck typing means that your function works for any subclass of (Pure)Path
without change.

----------

---

Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24132\>

---

[pfmoore]

I have no problem with that - it's a style choice certainly.

As I said, I'd like to see simpler subclassing of pathlib objects. I just think it'll be quite hard to do (given the complexities of classes for Windows/Unix as well as pure and concrete paths). So if it's just about examples like this, I personally would take the easier route and just go with standalone functions. If someone else felt strongly enough to design and implement a subclassing solution, that's fine though.

[projetmbc]

Are you the author of path lib ?

*Christophe BAL*
*Enseignant de mathématiques en Lycée **et développeur Python amateur*
*---*
*French math teacher in a "Lycée" **and **Python **amateur developer*

2015-05-06 21:01 GMT+02:00 Paul Moore <report@bugs.python.org>:

Paul Moore added the comment:

I have no problem with that - it's a style choice certainly.

As I said, I'd like to see simpler subclassing of pathlib objects. I just
think it'll be quite hard to do (given the complexities of classes for
Windows/Unix as well as pure and concrete paths). So if it's just about
examples like this, I personally would take the easier route and just go
with standalone functions. If someone else felt strongly enough to design
and implement a subclassing solution, that's fine though.

----------

---

Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24132\>

---

[pfmoore]

Are you the author of path lib ?

Nope, that's Antoine.

[projetmbc]

OK.
I will try to find a way to achieve an easier and cleaner way to sub class
pathlib.Path and co.

What is the good way to propose a patch ?

*Christophe BAL*
*Enseignant de mathématiques en Lycée **et développeur Python amateur*
*---*
*French math teacher in a "Lycée" **and **Python **amateur developer*

2015-05-06 21:09 GMT+02:00 Paul Moore <report@bugs.python.org>:

Paul Moore added the comment:

> Are you the author of path lib ?

Nope, that's Antoine.

----------

---

Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24132\>

---

[pfmoore]

What is the good way to propose a patch ?

If you have a patch, attach it here, and it will get reviewed.

[KevinNorris]

If I were designing pathlib from scratch, I would not have a separate Path class. I would instead do something like this:

In pathlib.py:

    if os.name == 'nt':
        Path = WindowsPath
    else:
        Path = PosixPath

Alternatively, Path() could be a factory function that picks one of those classes at runtime.

Of course, that still leaves the issue of where to put the method implementations which currently live in Path. We could change the name of Path to _Path and use the code above to continue providing a Path alias, but that might be too confusing. Another possibility is to pull those methods out into top-level functions and then alias them into methods in WindowsPath and PosixPath (perhaps using a decorator-like-thing to pass the flavor, instead of attaching it to the class).

The main thing, though, is that Path should not depend on its subclasses. That really strikes me as poor design, since it produces issues like this one.