Hi Dennis, On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 10:58:57AM +0200, Denis Kudriashov wrote: > Hi Alistair. > > Do you open the issue? > I found that it was already exist. Look at 13217 > <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/13217/FS-basename-with-compound-path-string>
I haven't opened it yet - as you suggested in the issue, given how busy Esteban and everyone is with getting Pharo 6 out the door, I'm waiting for Pharo 7 dev to start. I've got the code and automated tests done, although reading the issue has made me think that I should also review the class comments. I'll add a comment to the issue and then submit the patch once the Pharo 7 inbox is open. Thanks for letting me know about this. Cheers, Alistair > 2017-04-04 16:59 GMT+02:00 Alistair Grant <[email protected]>: > > > Hi Stef, > > > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 04:33:56PM +0200, Stephane Ducasse wrote: > > > Hi alistair > > > > > > We should target Pharo 70. > > > > Yep, I saw Esteban's message saying he hopes 6.0 is only a week away, so > > this can definitely wait. > > > > > > > Now it is great that you help improving the file frameworks. > > > Could you open a bug entry? > > > > Yep, I was just waiting to see if there was lots of resistance to these > > changes (which there doesn't seem to be). > > > > > > > Do you have tests? > > > > I was working on them when this email arrived. :-) > > > > I expect it will take me a week to get them to the point I'm happy (this > > is a part time hobby), but they'll definitely be part of the slice / > > pull request when I submit it. > > > > Cheers, > > Alistair > > > > > > > > > > Stef > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alistair Grant <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > I previously suggested a change to Path>>/ which actually covered two > > > > issues: > > > > > > > > 1. The handling of the parent directory notation, i.e. ".." > > > > 2. The construction of path segments when appending a string. > > > > > > > > As Damien pointed out, the first issue needs a bit more consideration. > > > > > > > > I think the second point is still problematic and can be addressed > > > > separately. In particular: > > > > > > > > ('/a/b/c' asFileReference / 'd/e/f') parent "File @ /a/b/c" > > > > > > > > I would expect the result to be "File @ /a/b/c/d/e" > > > > > > > > The fix is straightforward (although someone may be able to propose a > > > > more elgant solution): > > > > > > > > -- > > > > / aString > > > > | path additionalPath index | > > > > > > > > aString isEmptyOrNil > > > > ifTrue: [ Error signal: 'Path element cannot be empty > > or > > > > nil']. > > > > > > > > additionalPath := Path from: aString. > > > > path := self class new: self size + additionalPath size. > > > > path copyFrom: self. > > > > index := self size + 1. > > > > additionalPath do: [ :each | > > > > path at: index put: each. > > > > index := index + 1. > > > > ]. > > > > ^ path > > > > -- > > > > > > > > 1. Do you agree with the proposed change? > > > > 2. (Assuming you agree): Should we target Pharo 6.0 or 7.0? > > > > On one side, this is clearly a bug, on the other, no one has > > reported > > > > it to date, so it isn't having a big impact. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Alistair > > > > > > > > > > > >
