# Expose file size, mode, etc from \`pathlib.Path.info\` **URL:** \ **Category:** Ideas\ **Created:** [September 19, 2025, 4:25am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828 "2025-09-19T04:25:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![AndersMunch](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/andersmunch/32/12823_2.png) [@AndersMunch](https://discuss.python.org/u/AndersMunch)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2025, 12:34pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/21 "2025-09-24T12:34:58Z")
> [@pf\_moore](#): > > (A stronger argument, that I can’t really dispute, is that the `file_attributes` fields in the `stat` object are rarely used.) I don’t think file attributes are well enough supported for us to draw conclusions from their lack of use. `st_file_attributes` is not very discoverable: It’s not included in the repr of `stat_result`. And if you then want to change these flags, how do you do that? You can only set the readonly bit (chmod), and doing that uses a whole different nomenclature of posix mode bits. ---
**Author:** ![Monarch](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/monarch/32/18530_2.png) [@Monarch](https://discuss.python.org/u/Monarch)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2025, 5:05pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/22 "2025-09-24T17:05:07Z")
> [@barneygale](#): > > Rust’s `chmod()`-equivalent [`set_permissions()`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/fs/fn.set_permissions.html) accepts a `Permissions` object. We’re at something of a disadvantage in that our `os.chmod()` and `os.mkdir()` functions (which are used by pathlib) accept integer permissions, even on Windows. So perhaps our `WindowsPathPermissions` class needs a `mode()` function, but it’s faked entirely from the `readonly()` data, very roughly: `pathlib.Path` having non-cross-platform APIs is a mistake IMO, and we should be looking to reduce it instead of adding more, especially when things like `chmod()` silently do nothing on Windows for most input. That’s to say, I don’t think `WindowsPathPermissions` should have a `mode()` at all. > [@barneygale](#): > > edit: alternatively we put it in a utility function that’s called from `Path.chmod()` and `Path.mkdir()`: > > ```python > def _get_posix_mode(obj): > if isinstance(obj, PosixPathPermissions): > return obj.mode() > if isinstance(obj, PathPermissions): > return 0o444 if obj.readonly() else 0o666 > if isinstance(obj, int): > return obj > raise TypeError(...) > > ``` I definitely like this way more. It should stay a private utility. > [@barneygale](#): > > On `stat()`: > > [`Path.info`](https://docs.python.org/3.14/library/pathlib.html#pathlib.Path.info) is currently documented as a [`pathlib.types.PathInfo`](https://docs.python.org/3.14/library/pathlib.html#pathlib.types.PathInfo) object. That protocol will eventually be helpful for people building `Path`-like classes for virtual filesystems, and asking those folks to create an `os.stat_result`-ish object is annoying/borderline nonsensical. I agree! I don’t think `stat()` should be a part of the cross-platform `PathInfo`. It should be exclusive to the concrete `PosixPathInfo`. ---
**Author:** ![barneygale](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/barneygale/32/1882_2.png) [@barneygale](https://discuss.python.org/u/barneygale)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2025, 9:24pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/23 "2025-09-24T21:24:07Z")
Thanks all. If we lift the Rust `Permissions` API, should we use dataclasses? (I don’t see why not!) Should `PosixPermissions` have a single `mode` field (like Rust) or separate `owner`, `group` and `others` fields as suggested by Nineteendo and [illustrated](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/14) by Neil? I’m hopelessly undecided at the moment and looking for a convincing argument one way or the other. > [@Monarch](#): > > I don’t think `stat()` should be a part of the cross-platform `PathInfo`. It should be exclusive to the concrete `PosixPathInfo`. I suspect we need `WindowsPath.info.stat()` given `WindowsPath.stat()` is already a thing. If it wasn’t, I’d agree! FWIW I’ve opened [a PR that adds `stat()`](https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/139279). ---
**Author:** ![TeamSpen210](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/teamspen210/32/1004_2.png) [@TeamSpen210](https://discuss.python.org/u/TeamSpen210)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2025, 10:11pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/24 "2025-09-24T22:11:10Z")
Seperate owner/group/others fields makes more sense to me personally, since that’s semantically what they mean. Read permission for owner is the same permission as for group, just for a different user. Would make it convenient to copy from one category to another. ---
**Author:** ![ElevenPhonons](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/elevenphonons/32/29009_2.png) [@ElevenPhonons](https://discuss.python.org/u/ElevenPhonons)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2025, 6:44am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/25 "2025-09-25T06:44:32Z")
1. I am not sure it going to be obvious that `Path.info` is cached by design to many users. This will have to be documented in bold and then underlined 100 times. 2. It’s adding a bit of entropy. There’s now `p.is_dir()` and `p.info.is_dir()` amongst other methods. 3. Python is so terse, I’m not sure that `s = p.stat()` was really a big deal. It’s explicit and obvious. Was `Path.stat(cache=True)` considered? 4. Internally, pathlib needs to be careful when it’s calling `.info`. Methods like `copy` and `copy_info/from` need to be clear why they are using a cached values. 5. The “sugar” layer of taking the output of `os.stat()` and translating it to more digestible form/types (e.g., Datetime, Permissions, Mode) is a stellar addition. 6. Currently, if you want the sugar-ized output of `os.stat`, but not the caching, you’re out of luck? I suspect people will start using `Path.info` for the sugar but not realizing it’s cached. 7. For the case of `follow_symlinks=False`, don’t you have to repeatedly call `p.info.exists(follow_symlinks=False); p.info.is_dir(follow_symlinks=False)`? This isn’t particularly ergonomic? It’s a bit too late, but I would have advocated for something that is more symmetric with `info` and `stat` and that is not cached by default. 1. `Path.stat(follow_symlinks=True, cache=False)` to enable caching of stat call 2. `Path.info(follow_symlinks=True, cache=False)` with `info` having a sugar-ized stat output as well as `is_dir()` and friends that that can be optionally cached. ---
**Author:** ![barneygale](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/barneygale/32/1882_2.png) [@barneygale](https://discuss.python.org/u/barneygale)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2025, 12:14am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/26 "2025-09-26T00:14:07Z")
Thanks for the helpful feedback. Not replying to everything you raised here, but do re-raise anything important that I’ve skipped over. > [@ElevenPhonons](#): > > Internally, pathlib needs to be careful when it’s calling `.info`. Methods like `copy` and `copy_info/from` need to be clear why they are using a cached values. Agreed. Relatedly I think we need to make pathlib invalidate the `info` cache whenever it writes to the filesystem (e.g. in `mkdir()`, `chmod()`). Probably we need to make it user-clearable too - something I initially resisted. I’ll log a bug about this shortly. > [@ElevenPhonons](#): > > For the case of `follow_symlinks=False`, don’t you have to repeatedly call `p.info.exists(follow_symlinks=False); p.info.is_dir(follow_symlinks=False)`? This isn’t particularly ergonomic? I don’t think that’s needed - if you need special handling for symlinks, usually it’s only necessary add a `p.info.is_symlink()` check before `is_dir()` or `is_file()`, or to pass _follow\_symlinks_ to just one of those methods. > [@ElevenPhonons](#): > > Currently, if you want the sugar-ized output of `os.stat`, but not the caching, you’re out of luck? I suspect people will start using `Path.info` for the sugar but not realizing it’s cached. That’s correct, at least in this proposal. > [@ElevenPhonons](#): > > `Path.info(follow_symlinks=True, cache=False)` with `info` having a sugar-ized stat output as well as `is_dir()` and friends that that can be optionally cached. One potential issue with that design: `p.info().is_symlink()` would always be false, because `info()` has already followed symlinks. It’s also not clear whether `info()` can perform filesystem access (instead of `is_dir()` etc? in addition?), whereas an attribute `info` clears that up. ---
**Author:** ![barneygale](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/barneygale/32/1882_2.png) [@barneygale](https://discuss.python.org/u/barneygale)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2025, 12:41am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/27 "2025-09-26T00:41:41Z")
Q: should our `PosixPermissions` / `WindowsPermissions` objects by user-constructable? If so, do we need a `Permissions` superclass that morphs into a subclass upon construction (like `Path`), and what arguments should the initialisers accept? ---
**Author:** ![EpicWink](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/epicwink/32/17968_2.png) [@EpicWink](https://discuss.python.org/u/EpicWink)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2025, 12:43am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/28 "2025-09-29T00:43:53Z")
Having then constructable would be useful for equality tests ---
**Author:** ![moi90](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/moi90/32/8835_2.png) [@moi90](https://discuss.python.org/u/moi90)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2026, 8:39am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828/29 "2026-07-14T08:39:40Z")
Has there been any progress in implementing `Path.info.stat()`? It would be really useful to have filesize cached. [Previous page](https://discuss.python.org/t/expose-file-size-mode-etc-from-pathlib-path-info/103828.md?page=1)