Add Path.lexist() to pathlib

[lordmauve]

BPO	34137
Nosy	@brettcannon, @nphilipp, @lordmauve, @tirkarthi, @e-kayrakli
PRs	gh-78318: Add pathlib.Path.lexists and related #21157

^{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 2018-07-17.10:59:41.899>
labels = ['3.7', 'type-feature', 'library']
title = 'Add Path.lexist() to pathlib'
updated_at = <Date 2020-06-25.15:50:44.247>
user = 'https://github.com/lordmauve'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2020-06-25.15:50:44.247>
actor = 'nils'
assignee = 'none'
closed = False
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2018-07-17.10:59:41.899>
creator = 'lordmauve'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 34137
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 5.0
messages = ['321812', '321820', '321913', '321915', '372378']
nosy_count = 6.0
nosy_names = ['brett.cannon', 'nils', 'lordmauve', 'apatrushev', 'xtreak', 'e-kayrakli']
pr_nums = ['21157']
priority = 'normal'
resolution = None
stage = 'patch review'
status = 'open'
superseder = None
type = 'enhancement'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue34137'
versions = ['Python 3.7']

[lordmauve]

When using pathlib to manipulate paths that may be symlinks or regular files, a pattern that comes up frequently is this expression:

path.is_symlink() or path.exists()

os.path.lexists(path) can be used for this, but when using pathlib going back to os.path for this seems like defeat.

[e-kayrakli]

I haven't contributed to Python yet and I can contribute this as a way for me to practice the PR process in Python.

As this is a small addition, should I create a PR right away, or wait for a consensus here?

[brettcannon]

If you're okay with the PR being rejected because the decision is the method isn't desired, then feel free to go ahead and create a PR, Engin! But if you want to a better chance that it will eventually go in then I would wait for consensus.

[e-kayrakli]

Thanks for the response Brett! I am not going to rush, then. But if I happen to have some free time and motivation to create the PR, I will just do it. I don't mind revising or getting rejected.

[nphilipp]

I've come across this issue lately and proposed a PR which implements this and, analogous to os.stat(), adds a follow_symlinks parameter to Path.exists().

[AlexWaygood]

Closing as rejected -- see comments on the PR: #21157 (comment)