On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 08:19:47PM +0100, Neil Mitchell wrote:
Ok, this is a good use case. What should wget do if "isValid" fails?
makeValid is system dependant, and unspecified in its behaviour, although obviously some kind of closeness to the original would be ideal. So what if isValid fails and we don't have this?
Sorry, I meant to say what I think wget should do. IMO, it should have a conservative set of allowed characters, encode the filename into that set using an escaping mechanism it specifies, attempt to open the file O_EXCL, modify the name if it fails. The allowed characters set could perhaps come from the filepath module, though I suspect this is overkill. Simpler just to hard-code the set so that the name mangling is platform-independent and can be fully documented.
As you acknowledge, it's a crap-shoot. So what's the point? Its a case of reality, at the moment people use == to test if two file paths are equal, at least this is a better test. Why is it better?
Because its right more often, so pragmatically, is better
To me, that answer is unsatisfactory.
I think of that as a separate module, because extensions have no meaning to the system and can be done with portable, functional code, as far as I understand. Not really, what about getExtension "file.ext\lump" - the answer is "" on windows and ".ext\lump" on Posix. You would only call the extension functions on a segment name.
So this system independant extension module is dependant on a platform specific FilePath module? Or do you demand people make two function calls to get the extension?
One or the other, it seems a minor detail to me. There's nothing wrong with having the extension module use the filepath module.
Not to the system, but some programs like to make a difference.
How does it make a difference? Do you have an answer that applies uniformly to all programs? If not, aren't we just walking down a blind alley? I've heard that Emacs treats double-separators specially. Do we account for that too?
Haskell makes the difference, runInteractiveCommand vs runInteractiveProcess
I'm not following. Andrew