From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: port-filename and path canonicalization Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:12:03 +0200 Message-ID: <878w8jyr3w.fsf@gnu.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1271718854 22557 80.91.229.12 (19 Apr 2010 23:14:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 23:14:14 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 20 01:14:13 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-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 1O40AP-00070v-70 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:14:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60140 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O40AO-0005rI-NK for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:14:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O408b-00057z-Tj for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:12:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45115 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O408a-00057U-NZ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:12:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O408Y-0005fd-Jt for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:12:20 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:56526) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O408Y-0005fE-DT for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:12:18 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O408T-0006Fa-RJ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:12:13 +0200 Original-Received: from acces.bordeaux.inria.fr ([193.50.110.5]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:12:13 +0200 Original-Received: from ludo by acces.bordeaux.inria.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:12:13 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ connect(): No such file or directory Original-Lines: 23 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: acces.bordeaux.inria.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 1 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Flor=E9al?= an 218 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 83C4 F8E5 10A3 3B4C 5BEA D15D 77DD 95E2 EA52 ECF4 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:KDdSUxOsZ5IA/8MEfQWOiZQlKsU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:10263 Archived-At: Hi! Andy Wingo writes: > I recently added a global fluid, %file-port-name-canonicalization, which > defaults to #f. But if it's 'absolute, the port name of a file port will > be canonicalized to the absolute path; or, if it's 'relative, the port > name is the canonical name of the file, relative to the %load-path, or > the file name as given otherwise. > > The intention was to allow the user to control (port-filename P), so > that the user could find e.g. the absolute path corresponding to that > port at the time that it was made. My feeling is that ports shouldn’t have to deal with paths because that’s a separate concern. The %file-port-name-canonicalization fluid seems like an inelegant hack to me. When applications have special requirements about paths, then it should be up to the application logic to deal with that. Thanks, Ludo’.