From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 0528a7c: Ensure that expand-file-name returns an absolute file name Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2019 23:46:06 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20190708223951.10291.7621@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20190708223953.3172920BD5@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <83tvbw5408.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="173402"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: kbrown@cornell.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 09 06:01:07 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hkhJS-000iLt-Ux for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Jul 2019 06:01:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46422 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hkh5h-00028X-Eo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2019 23:46:53 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58471) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hkh55-00028R-BM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2019 23:46:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hkh54-0001EM-Ah for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2019 23:46:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:41381) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hkh51-0001Ad-Fh; Mon, 08 Jul 2019 23:46:11 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C9A2F100737; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 23:46:08 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 64F2B10067D; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 23:46:07 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1562643967; bh=UZsUO3qUVzN7orVz9Du4gLWqaZE6YY7TGwBMqELN+DE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=BDxBM8zQ8eoZ2+veD7y6PXu+0wTLmuhvXWbxbfTHkBnm5YS2UZ9pZWsPVorcrTrqX NRi0xHihRWnNE08Am43FtsgyUioEPnz6rPTZPzSKp+NdhY7rCrO4HU2HnhFi50eIXp tk0wM0m8E5sfCtnMKRYxB9M5KAeVSJp+r+nOUWhelUyuMt1zWERSTRzGMbgL7Vef0Q Q/iGohV/20+p/Ispq64Uz9bBEHv1C37V0bEQw6ZNW/YPyJMtIUnWLpPNbHio83TnlF 5T8/bDPmfnckLInr0WgWf7s9Ep+BGpgcR0Sv+YHxnxhBnYAuCN+sEwt5liZAE7GWFt r1EtZsKUDbWMg== Original-Received: from alfajor (76-10-138-228.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.138.228]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2DD5312082E; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 23:46:07 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83tvbw5408.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 09 Jul 2019 05:35:35 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:238430 Archived-At: > In the bug discussion I explained why I thought this alternative was > better. I didn't see it there. You mentioned that you preferred to avoid the inf-loop, but that doesn't mean you prefer for expand-file-name to use an arbitrary (hopefully) absolute file name as default default directory over signaling an error. In the OP's description of the problem, clearly the relative default-directory is in error, so trying to fix this case by changing one of Emacs core functions instead of just fixing that minor error seems odd: most likely the minor error will have to be fixed anyway because it will bump into other errors elsewhere or because it needs to work with Emacs<27. Signaling a clear error here would have helped the programmer find the real problem and fix it quickly, whereas the patch we installed caters to broken code, encouraging bad practices. Don't get me wrong: this is a minor issue, and I don't think it matters very much, but I'm rather surprised by the patch. Stefan