bug#36502: Fwd: bug#36502: 27.0.50; infinite loop in file-name-case-insensitive-p

[Paul Eggert]

Ken Brown wrote:
> > The patch looks OK to me, but shouldn't we also make
> > file-name-absolute-p recognize "~foo" as non-absolute when there's no
> > user named "foo"?  I thought we agreed this is a discrepancy we don't
> > want.
> I'm not sure.  The current behavior is longstanding and was explicitly
> documented by Paul (added to the CC) in the last couple years.  Might there be
> some code that relies on this behavior?

As I recall, I documented it because of the confusion encountered when dealing 
with Bug#28156 (Emacs quietly munges symlink contents).

I looked into the history of file-name-absolute-p back to 1991. Although the 
current behavior is indeed longstanding, I don't think it was originally 
intended to treat ~foo/x as absolute when "foo" is not a valid username. I think 
the code was originally written under the assumption that this case was not 
worth worrying about. My impression from looking at uses of file-name-absolute-p 
is that changing it to return nil here would improve correctness of the callers, 
though there would be a performance cost for this case of course.