Tobias Fröschle wrote, on 12/Mar/11 18:59 | Mar12:
Am Samstag, den 12.03.2011, 19:13 +0100 schrieb Ralf Reköndt:
Tobias Fröschle wrote:
(and there's no need to implement a FAT filesystem on the QL)
...which maybe has the advantage of true directories...
Cheers...Ralf
Ralf,
well, maybe when FAT directories would be used, you'd run into the same
problems with file/directory name ambiguity that QPC has on DOS file
systems - in VFAT, the directory marker "\" is disallowed to being part
of a file/directory name, in QDOS the underscore may well be part of it.
QPC has some (for good reasons) restrictions like not allowing RENAME on
DOS file systems.
All in all, I do think there's worse parts in the QDOS file system than
its directory handling - like the length restrictions for path names (32
characters don't quite fit into the 21st century).
I always thought it was path *and* filename. .... so I have got it
wrong all these years.
I got into serious trouble on my BBS. I thought I had it all sorted, by
reducing directory names to few letters, until I had to add three chrs -
"n1_"!
Mind you the ability to almost write a novel in PC directory structures
is equally troublesome.
Tony
--
QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255
t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk
Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman
TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
