Author jaraco
Recipients amaury.forgeotdarc, brian.curtin, jaraco, rhettinger
Date 2010-08-16.19:46:29
SpamBayes Score 0.00395715
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1281987991.19.0.923844995468.issue9445@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
In the case where I did use VOLUME_NAME_NT, I think I chose it because it returned a more robust result. That is, it's not clear what the result is if the result is not on a volume that is assigned a drive letter, but all files referenced must have a VOLUME_NAME_NT.

In other usage, I found that use of VOLUME_NAME_NT was unnatural, because it returned for the user a path that would be unfamiliar, rather than the more traditional VOLUME_NAME_DOS.

So, where the result is to be used by the interpreter and isn't exposed to the user, it seems prudent to use VOLUME_NAME_NT, and where the user will see the result, use VOLUME_NAME_DOS.

I admit, this is only a rule of thumb and may be subject to correction, but this was my motivation when making these selections.
History
Date User Action Args
2010-08-16 19:46:31jaracosetrecipients: + jaraco, rhettinger, amaury.forgeotdarc, brian.curtin
2010-08-16 19:46:31jaracosetmessageid: <1281987991.19.0.923844995468.issue9445@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2010-08-16 19:46:29jaracolinkissue9445 messages
2010-08-16 19:46:29jaracocreate