Re: Translations of folder names - two proposals

On Sat, 2004-12-11 at 17:35 +0000, Jamie McCracken wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-12-11 at 12:19 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > You're saying "the right UI decision is to expose the implementation
> > model"
> If we have an FDO lib to hide implementation details then that wouldn't
> really matter for non-script implementations. I would definitely prefer
> to use such a library in my code than concern myself with symlinks and
> how they're implemented.

That doesn't seem related to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that
the way the user believes it works need not have anything to do with how
it really works. Alan is saying that we can't "lie" to the user, they
have to see how it really works. (Which, ad absurdum, means we need to
hand them an assembler... but even not going ad absurdum, it is
generally considered a first principle of design that the implementation
should not leak into what the user has to think about.)

> What does seem to matter is the implementation is script friendly so
> symlinks and environment variables are good possibilities for
> implementation.

Or an even better possibility for script friendliness: "just use


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