Draft: Add WrappedFS interface #554
Open
+40
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
WrappedFS implements an optional interface to allow an afero.FS to be dereferenced to yield the underlying filesystem it is wrapping. It does not make sense in all circumstances, but can provide for example to allow determining if an afero filesystem is backed by an underlying OsFs.
|
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
WrappedFS implements an optional interface to allow an afero.FS to be dereferenced to yield the underlying filesystem it is wrapping. It does not make sense in all circumstances, but can provide for example to allow determining if an afero filesystem is backed by an underlying OsFs.
Closes #553
Draft PR to highlight the basic idea and solicit feedback - does this make sense?
The specific use case I have is holding something like
ReadOnlyFs(OsFS())and wanting to make sure that the underlying path is actually a filesystem path (in which case, acknowledging it's unsafe, I should be able to hand it off to a subprocess).