Re: [jamboost] project.jam question

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-03 09:23:22

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]>
To: <jamboost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: [jamboost] project.jam question

> David Abrahams wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]>
> >
> > > So, every rule is os.path might work by
> > > 1. converting everyting to internal form
> > > 2. doing what it does now
> > > 3. returning the native form
> > > Do you mean something like that?
> >
> > Yes, precisely.
>
> Okay. At least now I understand what you'd want. I have to think about
it for
> some more time. Is your primary motivation is that you find that
converting
> paths occurs frequently and is error-prone?

Yes. It also complicates the code. Just look at all the instances of
os.path.native and os.path.make that we have already. They'd all
disappear. Also, note that in many cases an un-normalized path is the
same as its normalized version, so no tests will discover if you forget
a conversion somewhere. The potential to produce awfully muddled bugs is
huge. In case it wasn't obvious, I feel very strongly about this.

-Dave