the fact that dial strings live in their own parallel
universe has always seemed un-plan 9-ish to me.
> network addresses and files are different kinds of names.
> mixing them would introduce ambiguities, like what
> if i have a file name 'tcp!bell-labs.com!http'.
we don't have this problem with devices, due to convention.
if we didn't have an implicit /net, i don't think your example
would lead to any confusion.
/net/tcp!bell-labs.com!http
is pretty clearly not a normal file.
on the other hand, making dial strings special, cuts the
namespace out of how network names are constructed.
you can't create a special case in networking with bind(1).
> also there was no obvious error response if you
> dial "a!b!c!d!e". is it a malformed address?
> not if a file name a!b!c!d!e exists. but in general, yes.
if dial strings are written with / and not !
/net/tcp/bell-labs.com/http,
an appropriately constructed namespace could
allow the "correct" fileserver to pass judgement.
- erik
