Re: testing for a remote file to include file on a Windows mappeddrive

[Stefan Monnier]

> `file-local-name' might not be a good name.
> The operation `unhandled-file-name-directory' returns a directory that
> isn't magic.  But remote names are not the only magic names, so
> "local" isn't necessarily the right way to describe the relationship
> between that directory and the argument.

The issue is not whether the returned file name is magic or not, but
whether it can be passed as-is to a subprocess.

> I think the same goes for `unhandled-file-name'.

I don't understand.  unhandled-file-name-directory is used to get
a directory that can be used as cwd for subprocesses.  And the new
operation is meant to be used to get a filename that can be passed
to subprocesses.  So AFAICT they share everything and should use the
same name.

> Perhaps `nonmagic-file-name' would be a better name.

The jka-compr implementation of this new operation should return the
file name unchanged, so it would return a filename that's still as magic
as before.  Hence nonmagic-file-name doesn't sound right.  But the main
reason why I do not like it is because it introduces a new word
("nonmagic") to describe the same concept as "unhandled" in
unhandled-file-name-directory.


        Stefan