Unblock paths > MAX_PATH without extended syntax. #3001
Conversation
JeremyKuhne
force-pushed
the
RemoveMaxPathChecks
branch
4 times, most recently
from
146c01e to
4da74ba
Compare
| @@ -9,10 +10,30 @@ partial class Interop | |||
| { | |||
| partial class mincore | |||
| { | |||
| /// <summary> | |||
| /// WARNING: This overload does not implicitly handle long paths. | |||
| /// </summary> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's rename it then. It's strange to have two overloads so similar and yet with so different behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you have any suggestions for naming? GetFullPathNameNoLongPath? This one in particular is used for the stack allocating code in PathHelper (all under MAX_PATH).
Like I mentioned, I intend to pass through these P/Invokes and normalize the naming. I want to drop the "W", use "Private" (anything better for that?), add comments on the privates to avoid leaking in other P/Invoke wrappers.
JeremyKuhne
force-pushed
the
RemoveMaxPathChecks
branch
from
4da74ba to
50a3b1a
Compare
| { | ||
| // There is no valid way to specify a relative path with two initial slashes | ||
| return !((path[1] == '\\') || (path[1] == '/')); | ||
| return !(IsDirectorySeparator(Path.DirectorySeparatorChar)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this be !IsDirectorySeparator(path[1])? It is probably worth making sure we have test coverage that would have caught this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah :/ I'll add the test for this one.
|
Other then the one issue and the renaming which you will be doing in a follow-up. The change looks good to me. |
Also allow directories up to max component length (255) as opening does not require extended syntax.
JeremyKuhne
force-pushed
the
RemoveMaxPathChecks
branch
from
50a3b1a to
496c66e
Compare
Unblock paths > MAX_PATH without extended syntax.
…hecks Unblock paths > MAX_PATH without extended syntax. Commit migrated from dotnet/corefx@f0fce53
Also allow directories up to max component length (255) as opening does not
require extended syntax.
@stephentoub, @weshaggard, @Priya91