# Make pathlib extensible **URL:** \ **Category:** Ideas\ **Created:** [February 24, 2020, 12:15am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/make-pathlib-extensible/3428 "2020-02-24T00:15:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 196
**Author:** ![encukou](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/encukou/32/2461_2.png) [@encukou](https://discuss.python.org/u/encukou)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2024, 10:56am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/make-pathlib-extensible/3428/196 "2024-11-29T10:56:15Z")
`move` seems like reasonable default implementation for _any_ kind of path, i.e. subclasses would get it “for free” if they implement the underlying operations (but they could also optimize it for copies within a “filesystem”). It would be sad if it went away. Similar for methods like `rename` or `replace`. Implementing them in the base class could be a good opportunity to ensure various Paths can work well together for users, without unnecessary effort from authors of the subclasses. Most of the `is_*` methods marked for removal are simple wrappers around `stat()`. I don’t think it makes much sense to remove these default implementations if `stat()` is still required. Which brings to mind what to do about `stat()`. It seems that _stat\_result_ itself could use a protocol (or generic superclass) – perhaps one with only attributes, not the old tuple-like interface? Or perhaps another class for with stat-related methods (including `is_*`, `chmod`, `touch`)? Besides read/write, there’s another split that affects what kind of operations are available/allowed. It _might_ be reasonable to encode this in the type system: - directory (`glob`, `walk`, `iterdir`; `mkdir`; `move_into` destination) - data (`open`, `read_*`; `write_*`) - link (`readlink`, `lstat`) (For example, `importlib.abc.Traversable` is essentially ReadablePathBase without links, `stat`, and some ease-of-life utilities that it could get “for free” by subclassing the base, like `glob`.) On the other hand, such a class hierarchy could easily become too complex to be usable. --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/make-pathlib-extensible/3428)._