From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: file-truename, convert-standard-filename Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:12:05 -0800 Message-ID: <38064152AFEA47BF9A5DBC6F9F16A6EF@us.oracle.com> References: <83k4urfqs9.fsf@gnu.org> <0B5BFE3DC87648888328B75164292F06@us.oracle.com> <83bpg2g2l8.fsf@gnu.org> <834oluf9c8.fsf@gnu.org> <07544B532C8E490F96FE0B1CF403C510@us.oracle.com> <83zl3mdo22.fsf@gnu.org> <50159.130.55.132.103.1267209232.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1267211685 10233 80.91.229.12 (26 Feb 2010 19:14:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:14:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Eli Zaretskii' , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 26 20:14:41 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nl5e3-0005Ot-UN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 20:14:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45617 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nl5e3-0004Uh-3t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:14:39 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Nl5du-0004Ty-Qc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:14:30 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48325 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nl5dt-0004Tp-5Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:14:29 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nl5ds-0002ZX-39 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:14:29 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet12.oracle.com ([141.146.126.234]:43684) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nl5dr-0002ZI-SL; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:14:28 -0500 Original-Received: from rcsinet13.oracle.com (rcsinet13.oracle.com [148.87.113.125]) by acsinet12.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o1QJEPcb032535 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:14:26 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153]) by rcsinet13.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o1QJEOfr031589; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:14:24 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt012.oracle.com by acsmt355.oracle.com with ESMTP id 53104021267211527; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:12:07 -0800 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.175.217.220) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:12:05 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <50159.130.55.132.103.1267209232.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> Thread-Index: Acq3EkK2HZ2RDtBSSIKgoGfqbdhzFQAA+QTw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Source-IP: acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090204.4B881D91.009D:SCFMA4539814,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:121405 Archived-At: > > OK. Then add "and you do not know whether the file named > > exists" to what I wrote. Again, that is the general case. > > I think too much attention is being paid to the question of > whether files exist, which adds noise because so often we > don't know (in advance) whether a particular file exists. > > The simple explanation is this > ... > > When the user asks to visit a file, or we get a filename from `ls' or > whatever other system source, the distinction between these > two sets is unimportant, because system tools will only > generate filenames in the valid set, and reporting to the user > that their filename is invalid is sufficient (as they can then > choose another). This is where I either still do not understand (probably) or do not completely agree. Platform-knowledgeable tools generating file names is one thing; a user entering a file name is another. If a user provides a file name, what's to ensure that the name is valid for the given platform? Much (most?) file-name input by users is lax, not requiring a match against an existing file. A user could include `?' for Windows, for instance. This might be where a connection with a test for an existing file would come in? (Dunno.) If my code gets a file name from the user, and I can't depend on it being valid for the given platform, why would I *not* need to call `convert...'? Just wondering. Seems to me this would be similar to the literal-file-name-string-in-code situation. Anyway, thanks for the extended explanation. It was what I eventually had understood from the thread, but it helps in any case. If it had come earlier in the thread, it might have made the thread shorter. ;-)