From: Keith M. <kei...@nt...> - 2005-06-11 14:58:48
|
On Saturday 11 June 2005 11:01 am, Danny Smith wrote: > I really can't comment on unseen patches. My comment on the basename and > dirname patch that Keith has submitted (after the discussion that followed) > is that I think they should be incorporated into libmingwex . How could > those specific patches get in the way of configuring a project for mingw?. Thanks Danny. It was never my intention that they be considered as anything other than candidates for inclusion in libmingwex. I would be pleased to see them there. You may recall that I had some reservations about these implementations, in particular that of dirname. I've since evaluated some extra test cases, uncovered some problems, fixed them, and added copyright/warranty disclaimers to both function implementations. Both now, AFAICT, are fully conformant with SUSv3, and I am pleased to offer them for use in their present form, as attached. Please note that there is one special case identified in SUSv3, where an implementation dependent choice is allowed -- specifically, how a path name such as "//foo" should be interpreted by dirname, or how "//" should be interpreted by basename. I've chosen to preserve the double slash in the return from dirname, and to return only a single slash from basename; this can be altered fairly easily, if preferred -- any thoughts? Best regards, Keith. |