Walter C. Pelissero wrote:
> Raymond Toy (RT/EUS) writes:
> > > > I also now see there are a whole bunch
of issues, like how should
> > > > "..a" be parsed? Is it name
= "..a", type = nil, or name = ".",
type
> > > > "a", or something else? My
head hurts.
> > >
> > > I suppose anything goes as long as you are
consistent. After all the
> > > concept of file type in the pathname is
alien to the Unix filesystem.
> > > Though, I can immagine, different behaviours
from different Lisp
> > > implementations may cause portability
issues.
> >
> > Converting strings to pathnames has never been
portable. If you want
> > portability, you need to use make-pathname
directly.
>
> Well, there are situation where you can't use
MAKE-PATHNAME yourself.
> DIRECTORY, for instance, will use it for you. That BTW
was the source
> of my problems. Knowing in advance what goes in type
and what goes in
> name, I believe, does simplify writing portable code.
Where can't you use make-pathname yourself? What do you
mean directory
will use it for you? (directory (make-pathname :directory
'(:absolute)
:name :wild)) works for me.
I would like to know how directory was the source of your
problem. Was
it because directory returned a list of pathnames for which
no
namestring could be printed, like "..."? Or
something else.
BTW, I've applied your patch. It looks good, and actually
fixes the
issue I raised about "..a". It is now :name
".", :type "a". This is
ok. It also passes a simple testsuite of pathnames, but
some more
testing needed.
Ray
|
