Cleanup Issue PATHNAME-PRINT-READ

Status
Passed, as amended, Jun89 X3J13
Category
CHANGE/ADDITION
References
File System Interface (pp409-427)

Problem Description

Although pathnames are required to print re-readably, there is no standardized representation for pathnames and so no standardized way in which they should print.

Further, it is common in programs to want pathnames to print in their file-system specific format.

Proposal (SHARPSIGN-P)

Define the reader syntax #P"..." to be equivalent to #.(PARSE-NAMESTRING "...").

Define that when *PRINT-ESCAPE* is true, the syntax #P"..." is how a pathname should be printed by WRITE (and hence by PRIN1, PRINT, etc.). The "..." is the namestring representation of the pathname.

Define that when *PRINT-ESCAPE* is NIL, WRITE writes a pathname object P by writing (NAMESTRING p) instead.

Test Cases

  (PARSE-NAMESTRING "foo.lisp")
  => #P"foo.lisp"

  (FORMAT NIL "Written to ~A." #P"foo.bin")
  => "Written to foo.bin."

  (TYPEP #P"foo.bin" 'PATHNAME)
  => T

Rationale

This satisfies the stated goals.

[For :ESCAPE T] It will not be possible to make the printed pathname printed representation totally portable because of variations in file systems, but for different Common Lisp implementations on the same file system, or for Common Lisp systems running on file systems having compatible syntax, portability would be improved by this specification.

Also, some implementations (eg, Symbolics Genera) use specialized representations for pathnames on different file systems. Eg, an MSDOS pathname is of type MSDOS-PATHNAME, not just type PATHNAME. #S(PATHNAME ...) is not only more verbose than necessary but might be misleading to some users because the object created will not have a TYPE-OF PATHNAME.

[For :ESCAPE NIL] Printing the namestring of a pathname is a common operation and it is convenient to have a shorthand for doing it. Further, some implementations may be able to optimize the presentation of a pathname in this mode by printing it without actually consing the string.

Current Practice

Symbolics Genera implements the proposed behavior.

Cost to Implementors

Fairly minor changes to the readtable and the printer.

Cost to Users

Users who now use the non-portable syntax #S(...) in order to enter literal pathnames might have to change. [However, implementations would be free to continue to support this read syntax for compatibility.]

Cost of Non-Adoption

Portability of code and data involving pathnames within a given file system (or between suitably similar file systems) would be hampered needlessly.

Benefits

The cost of non-adoption would be avoided.

Aesthetics

The #P syntax is pretty and hides unimportant details.

Discussion

Pitman supports this change.

----- Summary of discussion on CL-Cleanup:

EB noted that Lucid CL implements the proposed behavior and that there is cost to users who define their own #P read macro. He weakly supports the proposal but wishes someone had pursued a `generic pathnames' proposal.

Pierson noted that KCL uses #"...", but that this collides with proposed syntax for Dick Waters' pretty printer. He also thinks #P is better because it is already more widely used for that purpose.

Masinter noted that Envos Medley prints pathnames with the syntax #.(pathname "asdf"), which he thinks is not as pretty as #P"asdf" but currently more portable.

KMP and JonL raised the issues that #. has the disadvantage that it must be parsed by the full Lisp engine, while #P can be parsed by something simpler. Permitting #. leaves a gaping hole for trojan horses, and also requires the presence of the evaluator in a delivery system.

MLY, GSB, Peirson, and IIM argued for not using up an extra dispatch character.

MLY suggested #S(PATHNAME namestring [optional-host]).

IIM noted they use #.(PATHNAME namestring host) because different file systems have different parsing conventions.

Edit History