[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: PATHNAME-COMPONENT-CASE (version 4)
- To: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Re: Issue: PATHNAME-COMPONENT-CASE (version 4)
- From: masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: 24 May 89 23:34 PDT
- Cc: CL-Cleanup@sail.stanford.edu
- In-reply-to: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>'s message of Tue, 23 May 89 13:19 EDT
The problem description is convincing. I'm still not personally convinced
that this is the "best" solution to the problem, or that all aspects of the
problem are as bad as others.
I think it is intolerable that different implementations talk about the
*same* file system in different ways. I'm less certain that making things
portable across Tops-20 and Unix and DOS is as important, and warrents the
extra mechanism of additional keywords & arguments. However, I don't feel
too strongly about it.