----- Original Message -----
From: <d...@gnu.org>
To: <philehol...@googlemail.com>; <julien.ri...@gmail.com>;
<ianhuli...@gmail.com>; <m...@philholmes.net>
Cc: <lilypond-devel@gnu.org>; <re...@codereview-hr.appspotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: Add backup option to convert-ly (Issue 3572) (issue 14040043)
https://codereview.appspot.com/14040043/diff/6001/scripts/convert-ly.py
File scripts/convert-ly.py (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/14040043/diff/6001/scripts/convert-ly.py#newcode241
scripts/convert-ly.py:241: while os.path.exists(back_up) and
os.path.isfile(back_up):
I'd do a repeat-until loop here in order to keep non-numbered and
numbered backup files strictly separate.
With the current code, if there is no file~, the backup file will always
(even in the presence of -n) be called file~, but file~ is much more
prone to overwriting accidentally than file.~1~ not least of all by
convert-ly (when called without -n option at a later point of time)
itself.
Well, that's the whole point of this patch. Without this new code, the
backup is always over-written. With it, using the -b option prevents
over-writing.
I don't understand your point here, but would re-iterate - this patch fixes
the reported issue. When it's pushed, further tinkering is possible, so
let's just push a patch that simply adds a new option without changing
existing options one iota.
The expectation is that a file created with -n option will not be
deleted automatically. Naming the first "numbered" backup file file~
will violate that expectation.
The expectation of the current code is that backups are overwritten.
--
Phil Holmes
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
