>>> from pathlib import Path
>>> Path("a/b/c/d/e.txt").match('a/*/**/*')
False

Isn't this intended? According to https://docs.python.org/2/library/glob.html and wiki, typical UNIX glob pattern does not have the reqursive matching operator (`**`).

The ticket is not about glob but about pathlib.

Pathlib supports ** directory globbing, but it's only documented as prefix globbing, https://docs.python.org/3/library/pathlib.html#pathlib.Path.glob

** is supported not just as a prefix. Path('./Lib').glob('**/*.py') emits the same paths as Path('.').glob('Lib/**/*.py'). But ** is supported only in glob(), not in match(). The support of ** in match() is not documented. Would be worth to document explicitly that it is not supported.

Seems a bit strange to not have glob() and match() working the same though. Is there any reason for that?

I just ran into this also. It seems like a very strange omission that match and glob don't support the same patterns (and I'm surprised that they don't share more code).

Because of backwards compatibility (despite a statement saying it's not guaranteed for pathlib), I think the best approach would be to create a 'globmatch' function for PurePath instead of modifying the match function, and document that the match function does a different kind of matching. 

This isn't a patch for cpython per se (ironically, don't have time for that this month...), but here's a MIT-licensed gist that patches pathlib2 and adds a globmatch function to it, plus associated tests extracted from pathlib2 and my own ** related tests. Works for me, feel free to do with it as you wish.

https://gist.github.com/virtuald/dd0373bf3f26ec0730adf1da0fb929bb

issue34731 was a duplicate of this

pytest was affected, as we port more bits to pathlib we hit this as well

bruno kindly implemented a local workaround in https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/pull/3980/files#diff-63fc5ed688925b327a5af20405bf4b09R19

I think the idea of adding a globmatch function is a decent idea.

That is what I did in a library I wrote to get more out of glob than what Python offered out of the box: https://facelessuser.github.io/wcmatch/pathlib/#purepathglobmatch. 

Specifically the differences are globmatch is just a pure match of a path, it doesn't do the implied `**` at the beginning of a pattern like match does. While it doesn't enable `**` by default, such features are controlled by flags

>>> pathlib.Path("a/b/c/d/e.txt").match('a/*/**/*', flags=pathlib.GLOBSTAR)
True

This isn't to promote my library, but more to say, as a user, I found such functionality worth adding. I think it would be generally nice to have such functionality in some form in Python by default. Maybe something called `globmatch` that offers that could be worthwhile.

Today when porting some random project from os.path to pathlib I encountered a homemade filename matching method that I wanted to port to pathlib.Path.match. Unfortunately

>>> pathlib.Path('x').match('**/x')
False

although if I have a file called `x` in the current directory, both

>>> pathlib.Path('.').glob('**/x')

and zsh's

$ ls **/x

can find it. It would be really nice to have analogous .glob and .match methods.

I'm +1 on adding ** to match.

My first bet would be to add it to match, not adding a new method, nor a flag, as it should not break compatibility:

It would only break iif someone have a `**` in a match AND does *not* expect it to be recursive (as it would continue to match the previous files, it may just match more).

Would this break something I did not foresee?