[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issue: PATHNAME-LOGICAL (version 2)

I really like this, except that I have a problem with the syntax - it looks
too much like the Macintosh pathname syntax.  A name like "pcl:foo.lisp" can
be parsed as either a physical Macintosh pathname or a logical pathname.  I
realize that the proposal is unambiguous on this point, resolving it in favor
of a logical pathname.  But this means that a program defining a logical "pcl"
host thereby makes impossible for the user to access files on his physical
"pcl" disk.  Note that TOPS-20, VMS and (I think) MSDOS have a similar

How about using "!" as the host separator?