>>>>> "Fare" == Far <Far> writes:
Fare> On 31/08/05, Todd Sabin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So an implementation should
>> never give you a pathname with (:relative) as the directory component,
>> and it seems perfectly legal for implementations to say that
>> (make-pathname :directory '(:relative)) is either illegal, or means
>> the same as (make-pathname :directory nil).
Fare> That sounds like a plausible interpretation, if indeed there is no
Fare> usage rule that distinguishes a directory NIL from a directory
Fare> '(:RELATIVE). But then, because of the read-write similarity
Fare> requirement, the canonicalization should happen within MAKE-PATHNAME,
Fare> that should either refuse '(:RELATIVE) and issue an error or (perhaps
Fare> more helpful to the user) check for it and canonicalize to NIL.
If it's allowed for make-pathname to do these kinds of manipulations,
I think this is what we should do.
Another interesting case is (make-pathname :directory '(:relative
"/")). This is printed as #p"//". "/" is an illegal component, so I
think make-pathname should produce a warning or an error. Likewise
for (make-pathname :directory '(:absolute "abc/def")).
I have a patch to do this, but I need to do some testing.
Ray
