The following bytes were arranged on 6 Mar 2013 by Matthew Phillips : [snip]
> I have not looked at the unixlib code, but if it's just a matter of > using a single 32-bit word (an off_t ?) to keep track of enumerating two > directories independently via OS_GBPB there must be a solution which does not > involve assuming an increase of one per file, even without going as far as > scanning the whole directory at the outset. I have been wondering about this, with the caveat that I also have not looked at the UnixLib code. This is for wildcard scanning, right? Why would it need to go backwards in those circumstances? -- __<^>__ / _ _ \ I don't have a problem with God; it's his fan club I can't stand. ( ( |_| ) ) \_> <_/ ======================= Martin Bazley ========================== _______________________________________________ GCCSDK mailing list [email protected] Bugzilla: http://www.riscos.info/bugzilla/index.cgi List Info: http://www.riscos.info/mailman/listinfo/gcc Main Page: http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCCSDK
