Marko Schulz wrote:

>
>>I have never understood this: why doesn't Ruby store the cannonical 
>>(fully expanded) path name; that would eliminate this kind of problem.
>>    
>>
>
>I always thought this isn't done, so the programmer isn't deluded a
>false sense of security: There isn't always _the_ cannonical
>path. Think of filesystems that ignore the case in filenames. (Not to
>mention (symbolic and hard) links or alias names (single~1.rb)
>  
>
1. Would it be worse than it is now?

2. Why couldn't Ruby make the name cannonical. On a Unix-based box, for 
example, it could store the i-node number. Surely every operating system 
has _some_ way to get to a single target identifier for a given file?


Cheers


Dave