Re: normalizing filenames and strings
- From: "Denis Jacquerye" <moyogo gmail com>
- To: "Alexander Larsson" <alexl redhat com>
- Cc: Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>, desktop-devel-list gnome org, Xavier Bestel <xavier bestel free fr>
- Subject: Re: normalizing filenames and strings
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:40:18 +0200
On 3/28/07, Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com> wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 19:43 +0200, Denis Jacquerye wrote:
> On 3/28/07, Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 11:50 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 16:55 +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> > > Most applications that operate on files will accept file name
> > > arguments when invoked. What are we supposed to do with these?
> > > Bear in mind that the argument isn't only used by shell junkies.
> > > It's also used when, for example, you double-click a JPG to open
> > > EOG. Nautilus passes the file name to EOG.
> > >
> > > If we don't normalize, users might have a hard time opening
> > > files from the command line.
> > Filenames on disk can *never* *ever* be changed. They are byte strings
> > and must be treated as such, otherwise you can't open or operate on the
> > file they reference.
> > However, when creating a *new* file, given a utf8 string as filename, we
> > can normalize it before creating the file.
> For command line or invoked name, applications could test for the
> requested name; if inexistant, they should attempt with the
> canonically equivalent filenames existing.
No, its never right to guess like this. It can lead to all sorts of
problems, and it is a performance drag. File names are exact
identifiers, not UI strings.
So how should it be done? If I have a file "é" (precomposed) and I
type "é" (composed), how is the existing file going to be opened?
Denis Moyogo Jacquerye
] [Thread Prev