Paul Eggert writes:
> On 12/10/21 04:06, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
>> (thanks to your input on my previous patch, we discussed and decided not
>> to do case folding in our client code either).
>
> That patch still tries to case-fold one-letter drive specs, though -
> why bother doing that if you don't case-fold the rest of the file
> name?
Do you see a cheap way to return the correct casing for the rest of the
file name? That could be nice, maybe a change like that has a chance of
being accepted.
I agree it's quite debatable and a bit arbitrary to correct drive name
casing. The reasons why opted to put in after all are:
* it's cheap (I had the impression that if we found a cheap way to
return the canonical casing for the full file name, as opposed to
the unacceptably expensive scandir "solution", it might be
something that could be discussed),
* if a user uses a "wrongly cased" file name and expects the system
to work, that is sloppy and non-portable; it is acceptable for
the system not to "guess" and "correct" here,
* returning different casing of the drive letter can lead to the
result of canonicalize_file_name to be less canonical (as I
showed).
So, I included it because the "too expensive" and "not portable"
arguments do not hold for the drive letter, and it has a positive effect
on the "canonicalness" of the result.
I would be susceptible to the argument: correct all casing or correct
none, though, and remove that bit from this patch.
Greetings,
Janneke
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.com
