From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25183: 26.0.50; expanding quoted file name on w32 Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2016 12:43:24 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87a8c1xhwh.fsf@gmx.de> <83eg1dccvh.fsf@gnu.org> <8760mpxf3q.fsf@gmx.de> <87mvg0d33x.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <877f745izp.fsf@gmx.de> <83eg1bbxp5.fsf@gnu.org> <8337hdzdz2.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgv5a0py.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83y3z5xqer.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1482601458 24319 195.159.176.226 (24 Dec 2016 17:44:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2016 17:44:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Michael Albinus , 25183@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 24 18:44:13 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 1cKqMa-0005FK-Ii for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 18:44:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44355 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cKqMf-0003xa-8K for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 12:44:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44339) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cKqMZ-0003xV-50 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 12:44:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cKqMU-0008Ag-SY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 12:44:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:38582) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cKqMU-0008Ac-O1 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 12:44:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cKqMU-0003KM-Ew for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 12:44:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2016 17:44:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25183 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 25183-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25183.148260141212747 (code B ref 25183); Sat, 24 Dec 2016 17:44:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25183) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Dec 2016 17:43:32 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53981 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cKqLz-0003JX-PY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 12:43:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-oi0-f42.google.com ([209.85.218.42]:36051) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cKqLy-0003JI-DU for 25183@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 12:43:30 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-oi0-f42.google.com with SMTP id v84so295878266oie.3 for <25183@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 09:43:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=8wwJYPI6wgGozUB6FaIgn7Ti1l5l7Rau9Pg3e0LEF20=; b=P13zDFQMM4vCgCJqZ0rW2XjY0d6NcMQsBdy9B8eo5LJi/HLLcOYGZ0gL0SvzVEsyKu XFfacy0ZA9JlSNFbpU2iP3F7lxRvBjtuyOVNeY8eccdqTNpslF3WPbQnCUcH25T2ifjg iRCuNDW1J0auTIq2zJZJVm7o0ycqfjce8XJ8w7DMjrnCjbjJkrHwcsqEXNpEJUaPqMfM YGyUG2wuW5r8ODLXB6MNk1j3Vdmjc3IWo4HF2jbYbA1x4EJKZJLhEi7TJIIL7U4satCp EQAN9e/vaYzVz7Sz87TSzZI3Sv9P+5qDSJozlSNvEb0/Bdc+KSpVSQmsoYzuRlbC8oPD 5urA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8wwJYPI6wgGozUB6FaIgn7Ti1l5l7Rau9Pg3e0LEF20=; b=YI8bV5vvFHWpPdfB7f/fWgKBkkCYH7ch5OLpprSECLJlcjicGRsyy59yAhqEJ1hh07 7DnKlnX9LfvDfz9duWc9BP6CBypZNPcyseSDWY2e+xsbBgeAosoUpkp3b+AnWwvLgYvI fbMu8ZjyrMd4z6DYnPQgBEYWMCE+Q7Dm7uwW1khjC8GAECk3FtfjeIUgeDUpSAta6iyS mcRtzcYGWuI1+Outf7eF1z1jMCMc1Tb0742X8JSOZhyyXaqkwaTMn06XzVH7krpCyRc6 fhJOKBzkgspgJu+Ka+2y5CpfP6yj0hD2H4LY9FLRc646NlE1Hw+61c56q4Bvl3tBjaYw Zh2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXK7v/9RCU3DHAdx6y08AxTfIp+pvkyjkgY+xz2O4aaA3ulcBUrd4QbmJKvmuZlx6CheQ2gnwNfmtIsEkA== X-Received: by 10.157.55.230 with SMTP id x93mr9973987otb.181.1482601404700; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 09:43:24 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.157.45.104 with HTTP; Sat, 24 Dec 2016 09:43:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83y3z5xqer.fsf@gnu.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: nLjLgZEDVyjJN0hITzKlWY0fYTs 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:127412 Archived-At: On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net >> Cc: michael.albinus@gmx.de, 25183@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2016 08:57:45 -0500 >> >> If we want to extend the /: quoting to also apply to relative file names >> too, then the latter makes sense. Otherwise, the only consistent result >> would be >> >> (expand-file-name "/:~/path/./file") => (error "/: quoting relative file name") > > expand-file-name doesn't signal errors, and I don't think it would be > a good idea to have it start doing that. I think the status quo (leaving it inconsistent) is okay too (garbage in, garbage out). > >> As I've said in https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=25183#29, >> currently "/:~/foo" is a kind of paradoxical file name, being >> both/neither relative nor absolute. > > file-name-absolute-p is not smart enough to handle this case with the > rigor we are discussing, so I don't think this aspect is important for > the purposes of this discussion. The "/:" quoting was chosen because > it fools file-name-absolute-p, so the above is not surprising. I don't think file-name-absolute-p is relevant.