On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 10:37:14AM -0400, Beman Dawes wrote:
"David Daeschler" <daveregs@rsaisp.com> wrote in message news:d7n1to$rr7$1@sea.gmane.org...
Since the slash or slashes in that case are extraneous, I would also say option 2 is the way to go. Remove the trailing slash because it was probably not intended in the first place.
I don't believe removing a trailing slash is a good idea because that isn't how POSIX or Windows treats a trailing slash, and also because some apps may depend on it to distinguish between a directory path and a file path.
e.g a trailing slash changes semantics when dealing with symlinks: $ mkdir aaa $ touch aaa/monkey $ ln -s aaa bbb $ ls -l bbb lrwxrwxrwx 1 redi redi 3 Jun 2 18:40 bbb -> aaa $ ls -l bbb/ -rw-rw-r-- 1 redi redi 0 Jun 2 18:40 monkey In answer to your first question, I think I prefer (2) too. Regarding the escape sequence, do you want to play nicely with null-terminated char strings? If not, '\0' would be my choice, since that and '/' are the only characters POSIX disallows in a filename. But there are probably plenty of ways that would cause otherwise valid programs to fail. Then again, I'm not sure it's necessary to support slashes in filenames at all. jon