[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: paths are sensative to double separators
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: paths are sensative to double separators |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:48:44 +0900 |
Giorgos Keramidas writes:
> > Which is rather uncommon and has an obvious, Emacs-wide solution: C-q /.
>
> Unfortunately, quoting either slash of the double slash parts in
> something like `C-x C-f /etc//foo' still restarts the search from the
> filesystem root here
To me quoting the first slash would be a no-op, but quoting the second
slash should work. But it does the same thing you observe in 22.1.1
here. So I guess that's intentional.
I think it's astonishing that Emacs overrides the user's explicit
intent, and it should be changed.
> I think if `C-x C-f /etc/ C-q / foo' really passed "/etc//foo" as
> the file path name to the find-file function, it might be a nice
> change that doesn't feel too surprising to someone who relies on
> the current behavior.
I can't imagine anyone relies on having Emacs deliberately disobey
"/foo/" C-q "/" and convert it to "/".
Hm, interesting. In the minibuffer, XEmacs takes C-q at its word, but
find-file (and completion) indeed converts "/foo/bar//" to "/". This
is really ugly IMO. I wonder what it takes to fix. Interestingly,
"/etc/./foo" and "/etc/bar/../foo" work as expected, but both XEmacs
and Emacs 22.1.1 canonicalize the path to "/etc/foo".
N.B. This matters if you want to use URLs, because not only do you
need the colon-double-slash to define the authority (which could be
special-cased in the function that canonicalizes paths, I guess), but
the RFCs don't define the semantics of double slash (and the Mercurial
URL hg://foo/bar means something different from hg://foo//bar).
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, (continued)
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, xah lee, 2009/03/18
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Harald Hanche-Olsen, 2009/03/19
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Sebastian Rose, 2009/03/19
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Giorgos Keramidas, 2009/03/19
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/03/19
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Giorgos Keramidas, 2009/03/19
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Stefan Monnier, 2009/03/20
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/03/20
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Stefan Monnier, 2009/03/20
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Giorgos Keramidas, 2009/03/20
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Sebastian Rose, 2009/03/20
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Miles Bader, 2009/03/20
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/03/21
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Giorgos Keramidas, 2009/03/21
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/03/20
- Re: paths are sensative to double separators, Stefan Monnier, 2009/03/20