Re: Representing Unix filenames in Unicode

From: Antoine Leca (
Date: Wed Nov 30 2005 - 05:06:15 CST

  • Next message: Antoine Leca: "Re: Representing Unix filenames in Unicode"

    Chris Jacobs wrote:
    > Antoine Leca wrote:
    >> On Tuesday, November 29th, 2005 07:03Z, Chris Jacobs wrote:
    >>> What happens when two files have different, but canonical
    >>> equivalent, file names?
    >> The operating system sees two different files (without any
    >> relationship one with the other), and you (the user, the "human") see
    >> two files with apparently the same handle to grasp them (the same
    >> name).
    > I tend to side with the operating system here, and blame the
    > interface.

    I do not get you.

    If I am standing as an user here, everything is "the system."
    If I am standing as the operating system, I do not see any problem (just two
    files), as I said.

    What is "the interface"?

    >> My idea is that you are going to loose, so probably thou shalt not do
    >> that.
    > define 'that' ?

    To create two files with "different, but canonical equivalent, file names."

    Sorry it was not clear anough.

    > The interface should not suppose the filenames are in unicode just
    > because they look like unicode,

    Sure, but I do not see the point here (a similar problem happens usually
    exactly in the same way with plain US ASCII.)

    > the interface should be aware it are just byte strings?

    Well, on Unix-like OSes at least, filenames are just that, byte strings,
    ain't they?

    > or
    > The human should not do things the interface does not expect?

    What I meant was more like "Humans should not so things that (perhaps other)
    humans cannot understand later."

    And as Doug Ewell said, trying to correct these kind of actions is often
    fruitless, and very often misleading if not broken.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 30 2005 - 05:15:38 CST