GNU bug report logs -
#79036
[PATCH] Fix pdb tracking for remote filenames
Previous Next
Full log
Message #17 received at 79036 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
Hi Eli,
>> >> diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/python.el b/lisp/progmodes/python.el
>> >> index f4f0518dbfd..59977fcb49f 100644
>> >> --- a/lisp/progmodes/python.el
>> >> +++ b/lisp/progmodes/python.el
>> >> @@ -5079,8 +5079,10 @@ python-pdbtrack-set-tracked-buffer
>> >> "Set the buffer for FILE-NAME as the tracked buffer.
>> >> Internally it uses the `python-pdbtrack-tracked-buffer' variable.
>> >> Returns the tracked buffer."
>> >> - (let* ((file-name-prospect (concat (file-remote-p default-directory)
>> >> - file-name))
>> >> + (let* ((file-name-prospect (if (file-remote-p file-name)
>> >> + file-name
>> >> + (concat (file-remote-p default-directory)
>> >> + file-name)))
>> >> (file-buffer (get-file-buffer file-name-prospect)))
>> >> (unless file-buffer
>> >> (cond
>> >
>> > Shouldn't this code use 'expand-file-name' instead? Using 'concat' to
>> > construct file names is a bug waiting to happen, IME.
>>
>> `expand-file-name' wouldn't work if file-name is an absolute file name.
>
> I guess I'm missing something: doesn't this code want to produce an
> absolute file name? If not, what does it try to do?
>
>> `file-remote-p' is designed to cooperate with `concat'. It mentions it
>> in its docstring.
>
> So you agree with the patch? It looks strange to me that we should
> use file-remote-p in the branch where it is known that FILE-NAME is
> not a remote file name.
I didn't check the code, so I don't know whether file-name is guaranteed
to be a relative file name. The docstring doesn't tell about this promise.
I just checked the file-remote-p construct, used with concat.
Best regards, Michael.
This bug report was last modified 2 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.