On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll <juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Waldek Hebisch <hebi...@math.uni.wroc.pl> > wrote: >> >> One thing to consider is consistency between PROBE-FILE, RENAME-FILE >> and DELETE-FILE. While legal, it would be embarassing if PROBE-FILE >> said that file does not exist but DELETE-FILE succesfully removed >> directory. Similarly, if directories are supposed to be files >> in DELETE-FILE IMHO they should also be allowed in RENAME-FILE. > > PROBE-FILE and RENAME-FILE already work with directories in ECL, even if the > latter still does not like the trailing slash (should fix this)
I have two issues with respect to the merging of DELETE-FILE and RMDIR: 1. For physical pathnames it seems straightforward, but I do wonder if there are any unexpected gotchas when using logical pathnames. 2. DELETE-FILE is defined by the CLHS. People who use ECL without reading too much of the CLHS may expect DELETE-FILE to behave similarly across implementations. For example, it was a huge shock to me that in CLISP, PROBE-FILE signals an error when called with a pathname that represents a directory. This is one area where a CDR would be beneficial to the community to try and address some of these inconsistencies. Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct _______________________________________________ Ecls-list mailing list Ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ecls-list
