[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: PATHNAME-UNSPECIFIC-COMPONENT (Version 1)
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Issue: PATHNAME-UNSPECIFIC-COMPONENT (Version 1)
- From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Thu, 29 Dec 88 13:37 EST
- Cc: CL-Cleanup@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- In-reply-to: <881227112629.4.KMP@BOBOLINK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
I approve PATHNAME-TYPE-UNSPECIFIC:NEW-TOKEN (of course).
Where you note that Unix pathnames don't have versions, you
could also note that they don't have devices either.
The stuff about generic pathnames in the discussion section
was brain damage and may have lead to the confusion that caused
:unspecific to be dropped from Common Lisp. Only the stuff about
components not supported by a file system makes sense.