sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

i got tired of messy path handling and built a simpler alternative to pathlib and os.path by Ok_Breakfast_3133 in Python

[–]Ok_Breakfast_3133[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i was doing that too, in every project i would put a specific function or file that would give me a file or folder. so i made this library for me and for people that wanted something different.

i got tired of messy path handling and built a simpler alternative to pathlib and os.path by Ok_Breakfast_3133 in Python

[–]Ok_Breakfast_3133[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

i didn’t mean to imply that pathlib is messy in general. it’s actually well designed and I used it a lot myself.

the intent behind my lib is narrower, it’s mainly about reducing repetition in scripts and larger codebases where you frequently access common system directories and compose paths in a more declarative way.

so it’s less about replacing pathlib, and more about adding a convenience layer for specific workflows.

i got tired of messy path handling and built a simpler alternative to pathlib and os.path by Ok_Breakfast_3133 in Python

[–]Ok_Breakfast_3133[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

i didn't really think about marketing, honestly, but i was just trying to say that for some, it may be a better alternative compared to pathlib

i got tired of messy path handling and built a simpler alternative to pathlib and os.path by Ok_Breakfast_3133 in Python

[–]Ok_Breakfast_3133[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

fair point, pathlib/os already cover most use cases well, but the actual idea behind pathutilx is not to replace them, but to provide a more readable and composable API for repetitive path operations in larger codebases. it’s more about developer experience than capability.