Giles Lean wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > is_relative_to_cwd()? > > ../../../../some/other/place/not/under/cwd > > Names are hard, but if I understood the original post, the > revised function is intended to check that the directory is > below the current working directory.
We check for things like ".." other places, though we could roll that into the macro if we wanted. Because we are adding a new function, that might make sense. > If my understanding is wrong (always possible!) and it only > has to be on the same drive, then your name is probably better > although it doesn't mention 'drive' ... hrm. > > is_on_current_drive()? (Yuck.) > is_on_current_filesystem()? (Yuck, but at least more general.) > > I think we (or at least I) need some clarification from the > original poster about what the code is checking for in detail. I think you have to look at all the reference to is_absolute_path() in the C code. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + None of us is going to be here forever. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
