[Nmh-workers] Meaning of "+." or "+.."
I've looked at the code now and it's quite clear that the meaning of a folderspec beginning with either dot or double dot is relative to the current working directory, not the Path: profile entry. Does anyone know why or have thoughts on whether these semantics should be kept? It seems very deliberate. I can understand the thinking; "+/..." specifies an absolute path by treating the leading '/' as a special case, so dot and double dot are regarded similarly as special cases. There's a fair bit to consider here, including implications for "+" on its own as a folder spec. So far I'm inclined towards changing the meaning of "+." and "+..", but I don't use these features and would prefer to hear from people who do. Cheers, - Joel ___ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Re: [Nmh-workers] Meaning of "+." or "+.."
>I've looked at the code now and it's quite clear that the meaning of >a folderspec beginning with either dot or double dot is relative to >the current working directory, not the Path: profile entry. I've not used these forms of + (nobody on the list seems to use these [odd] undocumented constructs] but it seems to me that they ought to be with respect to Path: since @ is intended for relative specfications. Unless someone with a RAND specification of MH can explain why this makes sense I think minimizing special cases (which includes + folder) and least surprise (some might argue that excludes + folder) is best. -- Free map of local environmental resources: http://CambridgeMA.GreenMap.org -- MOTD on Pungenday, the 58th of Chaos, in the YOLD 3173: Dole for Pineapple ___ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Re: [Nmh-workers] Meaning of "+." or "+.."
Joel Reicher wrote: I've looked at the code now and it's quite clear that the meaning of a folderspec beginning with either dot or double dot is relative to the current working directory, not the Path: profile entry. Does anyone know why or have thoughts on whether these semantics should be kept? It seems very deliberate. I can understand the thinking; "+/..." specifies an absolute path by treating the leading '/' as a special case, so dot and double dot are regarded similarly as special cases. There's a fair bit to consider here, including implications for "+" on its own as a folder spec. So far I'm inclined towards changing the meaning of "+." and "+..", but I don't use these features and would prefer to hear from people who do. I use them all the time (+. and +../../../../alternative/path). I'd be sad if they went away. Frankly, it also makes sense to me that . and .. are special cased. Who on earth thinks in terms of relative paths to *anything* save their current working directory? Every time you run across an application that starts file names from a specified location, doesn't it feel completely wonky? Don't you feel like you're somehow attempting to circumvent some security thing? I do. My $0.02 Sean ___ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers