Talin wrote:
> Part 3: Does this mean that the current API cannot be improved?
>
> Certainly not! I think everyone (well, almost) agrees that there is much
> room for improvement in the current APIs. They certainly need to be
> refactored and recategorized.
>
> But I don't think that the solution is to take all of the path-related
> functions and drop them into a single class, or even a single module.
+1 from me.
(for both the fraction I quoted and everything else you said, including the
locator/inode/file distinction - although I'd also add that 'symbolic link'
and 'directory' exist at a similar level as 'file').
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4