Re: Correct ls/1 in c.erl
Björn Gustavsson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.erlang.patches |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CA+yh78Qaf6u9Zqttet15VkTwmoeFix4YdROoQigw1ZdjhN-L2A@mail.gmail.com> |
I'll try to clarify my question: Why test for existence at all if file:list_dir/1 has already told you that the file exists? On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Bengt Kleberg <[email protected]>wrote: > > > The filelib:is_dir/is_file/is_regular functions confuse me. I am unsure > what they will return for directories, files, links, special files, > none-existing files and the combination of read/no-read access for > these. > > file:read_link_info/1 is more predictable. > > > bengt > > On Mon, 2013-05-20 at 15:59 +0200, Björn Gustavsson wrote: > > On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Bengt Kleberg > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > 6> file:list_dir("nosuchfile"). > > {error,enotdir} > > > > I think to use file:read_link_info/1 to establish the > > existence of the > > file/directory. > > > > Why? > > > > > > If file:list_dir(Name) returns {error,enotdir}, it means that > > there exists a file named Name (but it is not a directory). > > > > > > If no such file exists, the return value will be {error,enoent}. > > > > > > In what situation would it be useful to call > > file:read_link_info/1? > > > > > > > > -- > > Björn Gustavsson, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB > > -- Björn Gustavsson, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB _______________________________________________ erlang-patches mailing list [email protected] http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches