From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#17848: #17848 add suffix search to -l even when directory part in argument Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:06:45 -0400 Message-ID: <87y4331ch6.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> References: <8737lyulkl.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <878tv9ndce.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831t10evoh.fsf@gnu.org> <8760qb9v5v.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <838tv6crlw.fsf@gnu.org> <8737le9cmt.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83k2epax17.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1473293265 6878 195.159.176.226 (8 Sep 2016 00:07:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 00:07:45 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: 17848@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 08 02:07:42 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bhmsU-00010u-6r for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2016 02:07:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43856 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bhmsR-0003YN-Ul for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:07:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53152) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bhmrz-0003KT-Sr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:07:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bhmru-0000rF-2y for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:07:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55273) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bhmrt-0000rB-Vn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:07:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bhmrt-0002Zq-Ob for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:07:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 00:07:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17848 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 17848-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17848.14732931939864 (code B ref 17848); Thu, 08 Sep 2016 00:07:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17848) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Sep 2016 00:06:33 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52985 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bhmrQ-0002Yx-V5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:06:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-it0-f49.google.com ([209.85.214.49]:37456) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bhmrP-0002Yb-AX; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:06:31 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-it0-f49.google.com with SMTP id e124so51536744ith.0; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 17:06:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=ojd7SAt9oH6xfmi238BFm4QzgdqKge3diQeDPGEo/UE=; b=tDWJDRDYEfo6g7HOgMfTOAUYsxDdR+2C/yx0XFBujkh6g3O5nnFIvPQJIMhmP4Qxp5 rZ771oaakKSr8e2z00Ly7wWEjOrXbSbbII7YYpclI6V1755yn+IboRXGtzBIPiUz6RTD WYF3fJPJwe3NABPqi9pnlERSKSGlQMv5faH0dORCfRtiBr6+uYOVGJQ0Wtzkj0KslVtP 6HW4nS7kZwPqkmmbSLOKuvoxlsSCitPmsXlwtqQEVD0YrcCpf44tjUJn0SyRGHUXEGsx TjpCBc+ELPfDpdYFMIN6qsBae+Mal5H3SNW+3rE55QJBG9cBZ/KWuhydpn538X7KmUNj zDlg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=ojd7SAt9oH6xfmi238BFm4QzgdqKge3diQeDPGEo/UE=; b=Xq/kVXDe5GEs8pErcHpn56gPP56zexh1aZRUBx/aQguFC95TafSw+3Hi5amPtfOIO1 HiBztXGu2FYCmYtLq8d81bGe/98Lrh5mS/NhO22U1QAdXzO9mBQn9EJqyBX0shDZlsor 9d2TFc2oWbGrDAjCEmZ5xd1ZYfA9kz4zJyTNN3yrOxAOcd0is0MJlTnQDV0oK4CVhS/D cu3x3BIXOuj5vDo4nwCg5YRdnZX0KmWgs0M1EXiAW8XBJNvBi2Dhz4pzsfK1N1n8Wz36 B2f6bRsPkcqEMCGvl+/OZEpudlQFhWM0W0mDuZ1QNrq+ID3h8CI9GAU/0M+IYVl6UEGO HW6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPKL//h8Y5z9+Qo8eFSXrxQfhYr6ekG/vCCyMbT5iLCK6FL3Qzh6uidh7p5tfPTEg== X-Received: by 10.36.55.146 with SMTP id r140mr11043956itr.73.1473293185656; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 17:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from zony ([45.2.7.130]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id r188sm4761721ith.7.2016.09.07.17.06.24 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 07 Sep 2016 17:06:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83k2epax17.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 06 Sep 2016 18:05:40 +0300") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:123075 Archived-At: tags 17848 - patch quit Eli Zaretskii writes: > The proposed patch indeed passes an absolute file name to 'load', but > it passes the name of the first candidate file found by 'locate-file', > and that could very well be different from what 'load' would have > found, because 'load' has some additional features and logic that > 'locate-file' doesn't. Actually, thinking more about it, I wonder what's wrong with just doing emacs -l '$PWD/foo' or even emacs -l $PWD/foo So then it's just a question of whether it's worth saving a few characters on the command line (to write ./foo instead of '$PWD/foo'), to which I'm inclined to answer "no", especially since implementing it turns out to be rather fiddly. > > One other thought: should we prefer an exact match, without any > extensions, in this particular case? IOW, should "-l ./foo" prefer > 'foo" even if "foo.el" or "foo.gz" etc. exist in the current > directory? If we should indeed prefer an exact match, then we might > need to tweak the order of the suffixes to support that.