From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 4d3a595: `load-path' should contain only directory names Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:22:22 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20151023135532.11512.53356@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <83mvv8wejc.fsf@gnu.org> <86bnboeymw.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <83wpuadc9k.fsf@gnu.org> <86d1w1ahsy.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <562E2A8A.1030601@yandex.ru> <83wpu9bns4.fsf@gnu.org> <86fv0x8kl6.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <83d1w0416d.fsf@gnu.org> <8337ww3ypz.fsf@gnu.org> <83vb9r2ddg.fsf@gnu.org> <83pozz2aup.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1446056568 16257 80.91.229.3 (28 Oct 2015 18:22:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 18:22:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 28 19:22:37 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZrVMp-0006bi-I0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 19:22:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40061 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZrVMp-0001B7-2B for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:22:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39827) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZrVMl-0001B0-4j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:22:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZrVMi-00014H-2L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:22:31 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:33303) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZrVMh-000149-SQ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:22:27 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id t9SIMMOV000331; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:22:22 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 1FD9066349; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:22:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83pozz2aup.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 28 Oct 2015 18:53:34 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV5473=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9393 : core <5473> : inlines <3953> : streams <1528897> : uri <2072028> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:192811 Archived-At: > And the manual clearly notes, for this very reason, "This is not quite > the same as the usual Unix terminology." Differing from existing terminology is not a quality (tho it's sometimes justified, of course). Here I don't see what justifies it. >> There are a few particular situations where the difference matters, >> indeed, but rather than co-opt the generally known term and load it >> with a more precise semantics than is usual, I'd prefer that we >> introduce new names for "directory name with a slash" and "directory >> name without a slash". > That's a mouthful that no one will use, and we will be back at the > same confusion. I didn't suggest to use those terms; I suggested that we define new terms for those specific concepts. Note that the distinction is very rarely needed, so those terms will rarely be used anyway. >> That's wrong, because an element of load-path may (or may not) have >> a trailing slash and we should (and do) handle both cases correctly as >> well, and all users of load-path (e.g. Stephen's code) should also >> handle both cases. > I already said that I disagree. So you think code which uses (dolist (d load-path) (... (concat d toto) ...)) should be considered correct and the users who did (add-to-list 'load-path "/foo/bar/") [ Or should it be "/foo/bar"? ] is the one to blame? How can that make sense? Why put the burden on the poor end user who barely understands what add-to-list does? What's the benefit, when the code can trivially be fixed by using `expand-file-name'? Stefan