«

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:41:10 +0200, Hendrik Maryns wrote:
> I?ve been using names like ?(?y)(y?--).mona? and ?E1 x (E1 y (& (& (>+ x
> y) (cat x NF)) (cat y PX))).gta? without problems, on Linux.

I like to use filenames like "-rf ~ &;" followed by random strings.
Keeps my users on their toes.

/gordon

--

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Eric Sosman wrote:

> Tom Anderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Eric Sosman wrote:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I was wondering if there was a quick way to ensure that a filename is
>>>> a safe.
>>>>
>>>> What I mean is that if I am creating a file from a string variable, I
>>>> want to ensure that the file will actually be able to be created. So
>>>> if it contains a "?", then clearly I would want to eliminate it.
>>>
>>> The "alphabets" for file names vary from system to system,
>>> and there are systems on which '?' is perfectly legal. So your
>>> "clearly" isn't really all that clear ...
>>
>> Oh come on, this is ridiculous.
>
> I surmise you've never needed to write code for multiple
> file systems.
>
>> The only safe and sane thing to do is to target the common set of valid
>> filenames - so exclude ?, /, \, , *, ", etc. Surely this is blindingly
>> obvious? This is not a complicated question, it's quite clear what the OP
>> wants to know, and you're not helping anyone by making a mountain out of a
>> molehill.
>
> Very well, then: "All portable file names shall consist
> of one to six decimal digits or upper-case English letters, one
> period, and zero to three decimal digits or upper-case English
> letters." If you're content with this as a least common denominator, you're
> all set.

Ah, i had indeed forgotten that there were filesystems like that!

Okay, lowest common denominator of filesystems in widespread use on
computers at present. Pre-LFN FAT32 and non-Joliet ISO 9660 don't qualify.

Although, is LFNless FAT32 used on memory cards for cameras?

>>> In general, though, you can't guarantee that a file will be creatable
>>> just by examining its name. On one widespread system,
>>> "D:\\README.TXT" is a perfectly valid file name but you are unlikely
>>> to succeed in creating a new file on a CD-ROM ... Or you may lack
>>> permission to create files in some folders, or the file system may be
>>> full, or ...
>>
>> True. And completely unconnected to what the OP asked.
>
> He asked for a file name that would quote ensure that the file will
> actually be able to be created end quote.

It was pretty clear to me from his post that that wasn't what he was
asking.

tom

--
The future is still out there, somewhere.

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:41:47 GMT, Roedy Green
<> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :

>see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/filenames.html for some thoughts on the
>problem

I have revised the essay based on some thoughts from Eric Sosman.
--

Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
The Java Glossary
http://mindprod.com

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Lew wrote:

> Eric Sosman wrote:
>>> He asked for a file name that would quote ensure that the file will
>>> actually be able to be created end quote.
>
> Tom Anderson wrote:
>> It was pretty clear to me from his post that that wasn't what he was
>> asking.
>
> The OP asked, in the first post:
>> What I mean is that if I am creating a file from a string variable,
>> I want to ensure that the file will actually be able to be created.
>
> Eric gave an exact quote, and even said, "quote ... end quote". How was
> it "pretty clear to [you] that that wasn't what [the OP] was asking",
> when it was word for word exactly what they asked?

Because the OP, i believe, expressed himself imperfectly, and the text
quoted did not accurately represent his query. If you examine the rest of
his post, that is clear. Cherry-picking sentences and interpreting them
literally is a useful rhetorical tool, but it doesn't help answer
questions.

tom

--
IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!!!

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008, Eric Sosman wrote:

> Tom Anderson wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Lew wrote:
>>
>>> Eric Sosman wrote:
>>>>> He asked for a file name that would quote ensure that the file will
>>>>> actually be able to be created end quote.
>>>
>>> Tom Anderson wrote:
>>>> It was pretty clear to me from his post that that wasn't what he was
>>>> asking.
>>>
>>> The OP asked, in the first post:
>>>> What I mean is that if I am creating a file from a string variable,
>>>> I want to ensure that the file will actually be able to be created.
>>>
>>> Eric gave an exact quote, and even said, "quote ... end quote". How was
>>> it "pretty clear to [you] that that wasn't what [the OP] was asking", when
>>> it was word for word exactly what they asked?
>>
>> Because the OP, i believe, expressed himself imperfectly, and the text
>> quoted did not accurately represent his query. If you examine the rest of
>> his post, that is clear. Cherry-picking sentences and interpreting them
>> literally is a useful rhetorical tool, but it doesn't help answer
>> questions.
>
> The original post contained three count them three paragraphs. The
> first was introductory, sort of a title for the rest. The second had
> two sentences, one whose operative portion was the material I quoted,
> and a second making it clear that the poster was thinking of lexical
> tests. The third made an analogy with lexical manipulation of URLs.

Right, so it was obvious that he was thinking of lexical tests, then?

> You've called me ridiculous,

Eric, i don't think i called you ridiculous, and i certainly didn't mean
to imply that. I apologise if it came across like that. I called something
you said ridiculous, and i think it was.

> you've accused me of twisting the O.P.'s words, and I'm starting to find
> your style of argumentation lacking in, well, style.

Again, my apologies. I'll try and be more entertaining in future.

tom

--
Throwin' Lyle's liquor away is like pickin' a fight with a meat packing
plant! -- Ray Smuckles