null filename handling question

[Dick Dunn]

I've found (somewhat to my dismay) that there's a difference in filename
handling between the 4.2 BSD and System III lineage.  In the AT&T systems,
a null filename (presented to open, access, etc.) behaves as the name of a
nonexistent file.  In the Berkeley system, it behaves as the name of the
current directory (i.e., the same as ".").  I don't know just when the
change occurred, tho it seems to me that V7 handled it as System III does.

Does anyone know when the split happened, and more to the point, why?  I'm
particularly curious as to what the use is for having the null name
reference the current directory.  I seem to fall into it periodically, and
the consequences of opening the current directory (which is usually at
least readable) instead of an expected data file are only occasionally
amusing.
-- 
Dick Dunn	{hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd		(303)444-5710 x3086
   ...I'm not cynical - just experienced.