not at all, pragmatic.excluding crap from filenames was and still is good. if you want to vote '\r' as "not a mistake" you can. but filenames created from buggy stuff die dead, as they should.
brucee On Jan 4, 2008 6:24 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 2008-Jan-3, at 19:29 , Russ Cox wrote: > > > In addition to NUL, surely / should be illegal! > > I certainly wouldn't want \n in file names; \r seems just too close. > > Pathological egregiousness? > > There is only one true separator, and that is '/'. In the context of > pathnames, '/' is NUL as per C strings. NUL in pathnames is silly, but > allowed, as per pathnames. > > It makes no sense, but if you can push a NUL into a pathname, you > should deal with the result. It's a pity the intermediate code has to > do so as well ... >
