We can label the path names in the previous question as semantic path names. If Bob types “cd ..” while in working directory d, the command changes the working directory to the directory in which d was created. To make the behavior of “..” more intuitive, Alice proposes that “..” should behave in path names syntactically. That is, the parent of a directory d, d/.. is the same directory that would obtain if we instead referred to that directory by removing the last path name component of d. For example, if Bob’s current working directory is /a/b/c and Bob types “cd ..”, the result is exactly as if Bob had executed “cd /a/b” 3.3a If the unix file system were to implement syntactic path names, in which directory would Bob end up after typing the following two commands?