You are *absolutely* correct and thank you for bringing me to task on that. My real vexation is with Windows for allowing this situation to occur in the first place. It's 2008! We have flying robot killer drones and LED contact lenses and laptops that fit inside envelopes. The failure to handle an arbitrary namespace for user file names is inexcusable. Especially when we encourage verbose naming to provide context.
There are two strands of stupidity that manifest: first, the user network drive X:\myfiles has a length of 10 characters; S:\userdata\shares\team1\myfiles, the share's root on the server, has a length of 32 characters. It's amazing the number of times that makes a difference and the check isn't performed against the volume root. Second, I can rename X:\myfiles\foo\bar to X:\myfiles\foo_in_modern_society_-_the_value_of_a_placeholder_in_semantic_interchange\bar and it doesn't check downstream to see if it has made anything illegally long.
They're neither trivial to fix, but they are trivial to work around: allow arbitrary large filenames.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: Here's the thing
Date: 2008-01-22 09:16 pm (UTC)There are two strands of stupidity that manifest: first, the user network drive X:\myfiles has a length of 10 characters; S:\userdata\shares\team1\myfiles, the share's root on the server, has a length of 32 characters. It's amazing the number of times that makes a difference and the check isn't performed against the volume root. Second, I can rename X:\myfiles\foo\bar to X:\myfiles\foo_in_modern_society_-_the_value_of_a_placeholder_in_semantic_interchange\bar and it doesn't check downstream to see if it has made anything illegally long.
They're neither trivial to fix, but they are trivial to work around: allow arbitrary large filenames.
Bloody Windows.