According to Michael G Schwern:
> Yes, there are lots of ways to check the cwd each filling in one edge
> case or another. However I'd like to believe its possible to come up with
> one simple, safe cwd() that works for 99.9% of the cases and call that cwd().
Well, it's certainly possible ... and it's not up to me, anyway; but I
still think it's a Bad Idea to standardize like that. I've already
said why (there's no good reason to pick one over another), though it
doesn't surprise me opinions differ. :-,
> A high level language really should smooth all that over.
An HLL or LLL, it doesn't really matter. This isn't a language
feature, this is an _operating_system_ feature. Pretending that the
system is providing an attribute that it really isn't just confuses
people in the long run.
> * The cwd is deleted
> * A parent directory is renamed
> * A parent directory is a symlink
s/parent/parent or current/g. Also:
* A parent or current directory is relocated entirely,
not just renamed within the same parent
* A parent or current directory has become unreadable
* Any of the above happens _during_ the execution of cwd(),
rather than beforehand
> [2] The state of Cwd.pm's docs add to my anxiety.
Sucker punch. :-)
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
