[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] cygwin support for tla, thoughts

From: michael Josenhans
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] cygwin support for tla, thoughts
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 23:50:02 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20030225

 >>>>>> "Tobias" == Tobias C Rittweiler <address@hidden> writes:

 >    >> Tom, your design sense is generally excellent; can you explain
 >    >> that design decision to us?

 >    Tobias> AFAIK one reason is, because it this way works better for
 >    Tobias> him and his emacs filemanager thingy. At least, he told me
 >    Tobias> so once, probably sarcastically.

 >It wasn't sarcasm.

 >This is good design given the infrastructure.  In Unix, it's easy to
 >do (split-string path "/").  With Tom's design, you do

 >(split-string (last (split-string path "/")) "--")

 >and now the program knows at what depth you are, simply by counting
 >the elements of the return value.  Similarly, for presentation to
 >humans, simply (last (split-string path "/")) tells a human exactly
 >where in the hierarchy you are.  The use of Lisp here is deliberate;
 >even if you never learned any Emacs Lisp, the algorithm is so
 >straightforward I bet you can tell what those expressions do.

 >With a .../$CAT/$BRN/$VER structure, on the other hand, the parsing
 >program needs to know a lot more about arch.  This means that
 >separately written tools will quickly start to constrain the
 >Arch-itect's options for redesign.  Helper programs get complex and
 >fault-prone; algorithms are abandoned in favor of heuristic

Then why not have the depth level at the end of every directory

E.g. why not have


instead of


This should cut down the length and would surely work with LISP too.


reply via email to

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