[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: How to handle whitespace in filenames ???



Craig Dickson wrote:
> 
> Michael D. Schleif wrote:
> 
> > How would you like to handle 0x08, 0x0a or 0x0d ???  Remember, we are
> > talking about text handling here, not binaries . . .
> 
> We can sensibly limit ourselves to printable characters for filenames;
> it's silly to suggest that if you let people use spaces, next they'll
> want control characters.

How so?  My reply is in response to this: ``well, it's a valid
character, why shouldn't it be there?''

Simply because something can be done does not warrant doing it . . .

> There is a good reason to support spaces if you want your OS to appeal
> to ex-Windows or ex-Mac users, who are used to creating filenames like
> "Letter to Joe.doc" or "Smith Family Budget.xls".

I'll leave that debate for others -- nevertheless, this is one
remarkable reason that windoze file handling is so weak ;>

Besides, my point, as stated previously, is this, "Perhaps, you ought to
``correct'' the tools, then impose arbitrary complexity ???"

Please, do not put the cart before the horse . . .

> Unfortuantely, since spaces in filenames have never been a priority for
> Unix users, most Unix tools behave counter-intuitively (from the
> perspective of someone new to the system) when confronted with such
> things.

In general, your examples are very weak.  Are you familiar with $IFS and
its ilk?

[ snip ]

> If Unix were just being developed today, without thirty years of history
> and backward-compatibility to worry about, I'd submit a bug report for
> things like this.

You might submit it; but, you wouldn't get very far.  Remember, we're
not talking just *nix here -- ever tried os/390?

> I understand why it works the way it does; I just
> think it was a mistake.

I was there, for some of this.  Trust me, it was no mistake . . .

-- 

Best Regards,

mds
mds resource
888.250.3987

Dare to fix things before they break . . .

Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much we
think we know.  The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . .



Reply to: