Avi,

It took me a while to page this one back in, but my my vague
recollection is that there were some odd bugs in the old file_util
with adding and removing extensions that made it behave in a way that
wasn't consistent.  I'm not sure this is all right, so don't hold me
to it.  I think it was due to some odd examples involving multiple
dots in the middle of filenames.  The assertion was that you should be
able to remove an extension from a path and add it back in and the
path should be the same as the one you started with.  If you take a
file like "foo..jpg" and then remove and add the extension to it, the
old code would mess it up.  Then there was an issue of what should
happen if you added the extension "jpg" to "foo.".  I do remember Mark
and I going back and forth about the on this and me finding the
details more irritating than I was expecting. ;-)

I could care less if you'd like to change this the way you described
if you can make it work.  Just make sure you get Mark as the reviewer
to help find all of the goofy edge cases. :-)

Erik


On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Avi Drissman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Erik—
>
> I don't understand why in http://codereview.chromium.org/17243 you defined
> Extension() to have a leading dot. It's easier to add a dot than take one
> off, and I don't understand why you insist on the equivalence you describe.
> How is ensuring that you could append the string values of the file and its
> extension together useful?
>
> Avi
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to