
18 Apr
2011
18 Apr
'11
7:05 a.m.
On Apr 9, 2011, at 12:56 AM, Phil Richards wrote:
I think the library should code against "normal" coding practise - and for that reason, I'd argue that .gitignore has stem .gitignore, and an empty extension.
I'd argue that .gitignore doesn't have an extension at all, empty or otherwise. Nor does "foo.", unless you can associate the empty extension with an application which handles such files when opened. In other words, I'd say any filename beginning or ending with a dot, or lacking one entirely, doesn't have an extension. Josh