3 ms·

Windows can be configured to have whole-volume case-sensitivity with NTFS, or even directory-specific case-sensitivity. However, case-sensitivity is user-unfri

by p_ing 2y ago

Windows can be configured to have whole-volume case-sensitivity with NTFS, or even directory-specific case-sensitivity. However, case-sensitivity is user-unfriendly. README.DOCX, Readme.docx, ReAdMe.DocX -- which document did they really want? When Jane Doe calls and tells John Doe to open the "readme" document, which one does she mean?

PaulHoule 2y ago
If I ask the question of "would it be perverse to deliberately write code to systematically depending on case?" I think about coding 11001000 as 'AAaaAaaa' or instead of a random identifier written like 798951cb-9fa4-4ca6-9a36-6b098a9cbd25 you write likewise in more or less https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascii85 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascii85 that last would be clever but unwise to write to the filesystem
- p_ing 2y ago
  .ToUpper() .ToLower() I say. Yes, you can find exceptions to the point of case-sensitivity is user-unfriendly. For developers, sure. For end users? It's always unfriendly. Though there's nothing wrong with file names with GUIDs; SharePoint does it all the time ;-)
jasonthorsness 2y ago
Case-insensitive helpers around a case-sensitive filenames are the best of both worlds. I don't want hello.txt to BE the same as Hello.txt, I just want to find it without using a capital letter. Thanks to this thread I just discovered <code>bind -s 'set completion-ignore-case on'</code> for bash which is going to make my life as someone who frequently switches between WSL2 and Windows cmd more pleasant.
- betelgeuse6 2y ago
  Having both hello.txt and Hello.txt is bad design in the first place no matter how you view it.
  - daurentius523 1y ago
    "bad design" - It is not design just result of Unicode rules. Mind you: naïve.txt naïve.txt can both exist, because: ï vs ï 0xC3AF vs 0x69CC88 is not same. Linux does sane (secure) thing - does not care. If bytes are different - name is different. Windows and mac don't solve this anyway. Having only one of Α.txt, A.txt, a.txt is not, and was not, а option.

by p_ing 2y ago

PaulHoule 2y ago

If I ask the question of "would it be perverse to deliberately write code to systematically depending on case?" I think about coding 11001000 as 'AAaaAaaa' or instead of a random identifier written like 798951cb-9fa4-4ca6-9a36-6b098a9cbd25 you write likewise in more or less https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascii85 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascii85 that last would be clever but unwise to write to the filesystem

p_ing 2y ago
.ToUpper() .ToLower() I say. Yes, you can find exceptions to the point of case-sensitivity is user-unfriendly. For developers, sure. For end users? It's always unfriendly. Though there's nothing wrong with file names with GUIDs; SharePoint does it all the time ;-)

jasonthorsness 2y ago

Case-insensitive helpers around a case-sensitive filenames are the best of both worlds. I don't want hello.txt to BE the same as Hello.txt, I just want to find it without using a capital letter. Thanks to this thread I just discovered <code>bind -s 'set completion-ignore-case on'</code> for bash which is going to make my life as someone who frequently switches between WSL2 and Windows cmd more pleasant.

betelgeuse6 2y ago
Having both hello.txt and Hello.txt is bad design in the first place no matter how you view it.
- daurentius523 1y ago
  "bad design" - It is not design just result of Unicode rules. Mind you: naïve.txt naïve.txt can both exist, because: ï vs ï 0xC3AF vs 0x69CC88 is not same. Linux does sane (secure) thing - does not care. If bytes are different - name is different. Windows and mac don't solve this anyway. Having only one of Α.txt, A.txt, a.txt is not, and was not, а option.