Christian Kellermann scripsit:
John, how do other schemes handle this situation?
Racket, Gauche, Gambit, Bigloo, Kawa, SISC, Chibi, Chez, SCM, Larceny,
Ypsilon, Mosh, IronScheme, Scheme 9, Elk, VX return #f.
MIT, scsh, Ikarus throw an exception.
Scheme48, KSi, SigScheme, Scheme 7, UMB,
* John Cowan co...@mercury.ccil.org [111010 08:30]:
Christian Kellermann scripsit:
John, how do other schemes handle this situation?
Racket, Gauche, Gambit, Bigloo, Kawa, SISC, Chibi, Chez, SCM, Larceny,
Ypsilon, Mosh, IronScheme, Scheme 9, Elk, VX return #f.
MIT, scsh, Ikarus throw an
Christian Kellermann scripsit:
Thanks for your research! Are you doing this manually btw or have
you scripted it?
Mostly manually. I have a trivial script called runallschemes that
executes all 28 Schemes in turn. I put the code in the X selection,
and then I can enter and execute it in each
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 04:30:12PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
Here's my argument: file-exists? should return #t if the file definitely
exists and #f if it definitely doesn't, and should throw an exception
if the implementation cannot tell. In the case of ENAMETOOLONG, the
file *cannot* exist,
I think just returning #f on ENAMETOOLONG is asking for trouble.
Simply punting on the issue by throwing an error is probably safer.
I agree with this.
cheers,
felix
___
Chicken-hackers mailing list
Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org
Peter Bex scripsit:
I think just returning #f on ENAMETOOLONG is asking for trouble.
Simply punting on the issue by throwing an error is probably safer.
Based on your evidence, I have to agree. ENAMETOOLONG should throw an error.
--
A witness cannot give evidence of his John Cowan
This patches avoids an error when [file|directory]-exists? gets
EOVERFLOW or ENOTDIR, which indicate an existing or no-existing file,
respectively.
cheers,
felix
commit 473edf9428a7bc38fc033e86d0bbcb362f1cd2d8
Author: felix fe...@call-with-current-continuation.org
Date: Sat Oct 8 15:09:42
Hi Alan!
* Alan Post alanp...@sunflowerriver.org [111008 18:48]:
On OpenBSD, I think you'd like to handle ENAMETOOLONG by returning
C_SCHEME_FALSE too. On that platform, EOVERFLOW is not returned
from stat. (And I'm not sure what it is signalling, so I don't
know what this if statement is
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 07:31:12PM +0200, Christian Kellermann wrote:
Hi Alan!
* Alan Post alanp...@sunflowerriver.org [111008 18:48]:
On OpenBSD, I think you'd like to handle ENAMETOOLONG by returning
C_SCHEME_FALSE too. On that platform, EOVERFLOW is not returned
from stat. (And I'm
* Alan Post alanp...@sunflowerriver.org [111008 20:58]:
Here would be the sort of pseudocode I mean:
file = 'really-long-file-path'
for-each dir in /mnt/*
path = dir + file
file-exists? path
Who knows what a user has mounted inside /mnt. It might a
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 09:09:26PM +0200, Christian Kellermann wrote:
* Alan Post alanp...@sunflowerriver.org [111008 20:58]:
Here would be the sort of pseudocode I mean:
file = 'really-long-file-path'
for-each dir in /mnt/*
path = dir + file
Christian Kellermann scripsit:
Wouldn't the right answer be in this case We don't know whether this
file exists, because some Bad Thing(tm) happened while trying to find
out instead of yes or no?
No. If ENAMETOOLONG is returned, the file can't possibly exist (because
the filesystem has no
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 09:43:17PM +0200, Christian Kellermann wrote:
* Alan Post alanp...@sunflowerriver.org [111008 21:37]:
Here is my new proposal:
Do not check for ENAMETOOLONG (I withdraw that proposal) and wait
for a user to encounter a problem in real life for which adding
an
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 04:11:47PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
Christian Kellermann scripsit:
Wouldn't the right answer be in this case We don't know whether this
file exists, because some Bad Thing(tm) happened while trying to find
out instead of yes or no?
No. If ENAMETOOLONG is
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 04:11:47PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
Christian Kellermann scripsit:
Wouldn't the right answer be in this case We don't know whether this
file exists, because some Bad Thing(tm) happened while trying to find
out instead of yes or no?
No. If ENAMETOOLONG is
Alan Post scripsit:
No. If ENAMETOOLONG is returned, the file can't possibly exist (because
the filesystem has no way to represent it), so it's always correct to
return #f in that case.
(I'm sorry this got divided into three messages! I'm typing faster
than I'm thinking...)
Slow down
Hi Alan!
* Alan Post alanp...@sunflowerriver.org [111008 22:23]:
I'm sorry that I don't seem to be communicating well today: I'm only
in and out at my computer trying to do other things and it seems to
be affecting my ability to be articulate.
Thanks for bearing with me, I think I have
* John Cowan co...@mercury.ccil.org [111008 22:30]:
Here's my argument: file-exists? should return #t if the file definitely
exists and #f if it definitely doesn't, and should throw an exception
if the implementation cannot tell. In the case of ENAMETOOLONG, the
file *cannot* exist, so
Christian Kellermann scripsit:
I personally prefer to get yelled at when I provide nonsense input
to a function but that may be irrellevant if everyone else would
expect to get different things.
It's not really nonsense. For example, if your current directory is on
a FAT (not VFAT) file
19 matches
Mail list logo
