Re: Review of SRFI 170 through 3.2 I/O Lassi Kortela 22 Apr 2020 20:53 UTC
> For Issues, as Lassi has noted, the notion of current directory > needs to be clarified or refined, or I'm pretty sure mentioned there. > > I'm pushing back on this. Posix says the current directory is > per-process, and for SRFI 170 purposes, per-process it is. Implementers > of SRFI-170 can add change-thread-directory and its setter, or simply > derogate from the SRFI in their documentation. I've added a note to > this effect. Unfortunately `working-directory` and `set-working-directory` are the least of our problems. The main problem is every other procedure in the SRFI that takes a pathname. In Schemes like Gambit and Kawa, it would most likely confuse users if those pathnames are not interpreted relative to the thread CWD.