Re: Interpretation of extensions different from Unix/Linux?

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message 
news:qyn3t7gwzai0$.1sy8ut5f57ryw.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:08:31 -0500, Randy Brukardt wrote:
...
>> I disagree with everything you wrote on this topic. And there will be a 
>> way
>> to enumerate roots over my dead body, because it is not reliably
>> implementable on Windows (no matter how you define the roots).
>
> Then the consequence must be removing Ada.Directories altogether.

<Sarcasm> That makes sense: I can't have one rarely used capatibility, so no 
one should have any commonly used capabilities, either. </Sarcasm>

In any case, I think you are seriously confused about the purpose of 
Ada.Directories. It is all about manipulating file and directories (and 
their names) that come from some outside source. It is *not* about 
constructing file names from nothing.

Indeed, no competent programmer should ever be constructing file names from 
nothing, because that is how you get the abomination of hard-coded paths and 
file names. Those *always* cause trouble. These things have to come from 
outside of the file system (commonly from the environment or GUI) and thus 
Ada.Directories has nothing to do with their source.

You want to use Ada.Directories for purposes for which it was not intended, 
so it isn't surprising that it doesn't work. And for purposes that are a bad 
idea in the first place, so there is no reason for Ada to support them.

                                Randy.