Re: [PATCH 2/5] [mingw]: Have compiled-file-name produce valid names.

[Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>]

Hi,

On Sun 01 May 2011 21:23, Noah Lavine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com> writes:

>> Yep!  Check that racket web page I linked to.  You don't have to
>> implement all of it, but it should be possible to implement, given the
>> path abstraction.
>
> Okay, I've read it. It doesn't seem very complicated. Should we strive
> for API compatibility? I don't see any programs needing it right now,
> but maybe there would be in the future if we made them compatible.

I don't think we need to be compatible, no.  That said it does look
pretty good.

> I think of a path as a vector of "path elements", each of which
> represents a directory except that the last one might represent a
> file. I notice the Racket path library makes their path object
> distinct from this - you can build a path from a list of path elements
> with build-path, and turn a path into a list of path elements with
> explode-path, but you can't take an actual path object and manipulate
> its components (unless I've missed something).  Do you think this is
> the right way to think of it?

I think that might be what you want sometimes, but it doesn't correspond
to the underlying OS path concept.  You could build such a thing on top
of the byte arrays, but I don't think a vector (or list, ...) is always
going to be what you want.  I don't know.  I would say to stick with
byte arrays and strings on the lowest level.

Cheers,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/