Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> writes: >> But presumably you mean that we delete "foo/bar/baz/xyzzy", etc, up to >> "foo/bar/baz", provided they are all empty directories. I think your >> comment is probably OK and I was just being thick, but maybe stating it >> like: >> >> ...removes the directory if it is empty (and recursively any empty >> directories it contains) and calls the function again. >> >> would be more clear. That is still leaving the definition of "empty" >> implied, but it's hopefully obvious from the context. > > Yes, that's clearer. I'll change it. Thanks!
Thanks. Will tweak it in while queuing.
