> On January 26, 2016 at 2:30 PM Rainer Weikusat > <rainerweiku...@virginmedia.com> wrote: > > Peter Olson <pe...@peabo.com> writes: > >> On January 25, 2016 at 5:54 PM Rainer Weikusat > >> <rainerweiku...@virginmedia.com> wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >> A related but IMHO more interesting set of questions could be: > > [..] > > > It must be trivial crap because nobody ever made a programming error parsing > > path names when they rolled their own routines for it. > > It's trivial because its about 3 or 4 lines of code, at least for a > reasonable implementation. That's a property of the code and not one of > hypothetical people who could be writing code. Eg, in order to write > code, one has to learn to write first and this is anything but trivial > as it needs years of practice. > > > Also: Windows and Mac path names follow different rules. > > The (fairly recently introduced) BSD basename library function (whose > semantics > are quite different > from the semantics of the one I posted) > doesn't deal with anything but UNIX(*) pathnames.
How quite different? I just looked at Windows implementation of basename and note that it avoids the ".ext" of the file. Thanks, Windows :-) > Programs I write as part of my slowly growing set of "tools usable for > starting/ manageing processes" certainly don't have to deal with > "Windows and Mac path names", either. I try to avoid non-UNIX(*) environments as well, but if I am serious about free software I should take portability into account where I can. > > Use the libraries. > > "Use libraries insofar you consider them useful." And a library > implementation of 'basename' is not something I'd consider useful, > especially when using it portably would require more code than not using > it (the string would need to be copied, including handling errors in > that, and the result would need to be copied, including handling errors > in that, and all the weird special cases someone considered sensible > would need to be dealt with one by one in order to achieve what I wanted > to achieve and even then, there'd be differences). This patch illustrates the rathole of compatibility across OS implementations: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2014-07/msg00012.html > it (the string would need to be copied, including handling errors in Living on the edge? Most parsing of path names occurs at main(), but I hope you won't run out of memory in the middle of a long job. After all, alloca always works :-; Peter Olson _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
