Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #15328
| From | Stephane Chazelas <stephane.chazelas@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | gnu.bash.bug |
| Subject | Re: Pathname expansion vs. filename expansion |
| Date | 2019-08-20 16:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.509.1566315028.30381.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink) |
| References | <CAJnmqwY42QvC5FO_35efmPnuookSfvGm2_hWtxmaCp_FCSyhDw@mail.gmail.com> <87094e8a-3a60-5ad1-ac26-815a4a8a7ed7@case.edu> <20190820151542.6pvfuk32niplx7pt@chaz.gmail.com> <20190820153021.w777rizqvsgmi4nf@chaz.gmail.com> |
2019-08-20 16:15:42 +0100, Stephane Chazelas: [...] > https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/GNU-Manuals.html#GNU-Manuals > > GNU> Please do not use the term “pathname” that is used in Unix > GNU> documentation; use “file name” (two words) instead. We use the > GNU> term “path” only for search paths, which are lists of directory > GNU> names. > > So I guess that should be "file name expansion" > > That's probably not the right place to argue whether that GNU > recommendations makes sense, but note that the FTP RFC (1985 > https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc959.txt, so predates POSIX if not > the GNU project) defines pathname as [...] Actually, Unix V1 in 1970 already used "pathname" for that, long before the concept of the environment (let alone $PATH) was introduced. I don't know why rms insists on using "file name" here which at best is ambiguous. See https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-standards/2009-11/msg00003.html and rms response: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-standards/2009-11/msg00005.html See also "filename generation" or "globbing" which avoid the potential confusion with ~user and <(...) which also are "pathname expansion" operators. -- Stephane
Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Pathname expansion vs. filename expansion Stephane Chazelas <stephane.chazelas@gmail.com> - 2019-08-20 16:30 +0100
csiph-web