I don’t believe that it’s named well — it should be “Stop” if it doesn’t, and “Undo” if it does.
No, cancelling an operation would just stop it and not do anything else.
I don’t agree that stopping a file operation should undo itself because it could cause problems depending on what happened during the operation.
Actually it does undo for the current file, but not for multiple files. So it’s neither stop nor undo, but somewhere in between.
It’s an operation which is a set of instruction to finish. So stopping or cancelling it is the same, which means it doesn’t respect the integrity of modified files.
If it was a transaction then it will start by creating a saving point then work on some temporary copies and if anything goes wrong at any step (triggered by an issue or even cancel or stop action) then it will restore its state to that saved point.
@bbonacci, I agree. It was that concern which caused me to ask.
@medin, is it an operation because a transaction would necessitate duplication (caching) of the files before any potentially destructive operation were to occur?