Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Do you see a cheap way to return the correct casing for the rest of the > file name?
No. [1] > I agree it's quite debatable and a bit arbitrary to correct drive name > casing. The reasons why opted to put in after all are: > > * it's cheap (I had the impression that if we found a cheap way to > return the canonical casing for the full file name, as opposed to > the unacceptably expensive scandir "solution", it might be > something that could be discussed), Still, it's adding complexity. And it does not help solving the original problem, namely that the processor that interprets #include "c:/foo.h" #include "C:/FOO.H" #include "C:\\FOO.H" cannot just assume that different file names correspond to different files on disk. Why add complexity if solving the root problem requires a different approach anyway? Bruno [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2021-12/msg00069.html
