[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: convert-standard-filename

From: Lennart Borgman
Subject: Re: convert-standard-filename
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 17:43:18 +0200

On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 17:33, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> But how should it decide what is relative and what is not, e.g. in the
>>> case of "c:/foo" (or worse "c:foo") mentioned in the docstring?
>> Why by file-name-absolute-p, of course ;-)
> This would mean that the input is interpreted in an OS-dependent way.
> It would seem to make more sense to say that the arg to
> convert-filename-argument (or its new replacement) should be
> a Unix-style filename, i.e. "C:<foo>" is always interpreted as
> a relative file name, even under Window or DOS.

If we allow OS-dependent file names then does it not make more sense
to interpret them in the OS-dependent way? At least that seems much
more likely to make users surprised.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]