[fuse-devel] Re: Patch for Python bindings

[Csaba H. <csa...@cr...>]

On 2006-05-25, Rob Bradford <ro...@de...> wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 05:57:35AM +0000, Csaba Henk wrote:
>> Instead of hacking the traditional indexes of a Python stat tuple, I'd
>> suggest keeping the st_rdev value at the end of the tuple (at index 10,
>> with zero-based indexing) and leaving the rest intact.
>
> This was intentional. Since the order of the arguments follows the struct stat
> structure I thought it best to continue to follow that.

Well so, then we have a C system iterface vs. Python conventions
conflict. I'd still go for pleasing the latter... we are in it for
Python.

Cf. http://docs.python.org/lib/os-file-dir.html

  stat(path)
    Perform a stat() system call on the given path. The return value is
    an object whose attributes correspond to the members of the stat
    structure, namely: st_mode ... st_ctime ... .
        ...
    On some Unix systems (such as Linux), the following attributes may
    also be available: st_blocks (number of blocks allocated for file),
    st_blksize (filesystem blocksize), st_rdev (type of device if an inode
    device).
       ...
    For backward compatibility, the return value of stat() is also
    accessible as a tuple of at least 10 integers giving the most important
    (and portable) members of the stat structure, in the order st_mode,
    st_ino, st_dev, st_nlink, st_uid, st_gid, st_size, st_atime, st_mtime,
    st_ctime. More items may be added at the end by some implementations.
    
-- From which I concur:
    - st_rdev is system specific, therefore you can't just say "it's at
      the n-th position".
    - designers of Python also vote for leaving the 10 standard fields
      as-is, and append the rest in a non specified way.

Regards,
Csaba