Greg: > > Well, we may need to devise some tests to be sure this is still a > problem, but in the past, Windows would deliver binary files in > 128-byte chunks, meaning that the last chunk might have garbage at the > end of it that was not actually produced by the program that sent it. >
Schorsch > That sounds like a severely broken implementation. I can't possibly > imagine this still to be the case. If there's a test case, I'll check > it out. It's a hang-over from MS-DOS and its FAT filesystem, which measured files in blocks rather than bytes. I'd be surprised if Windows NTFS has the problem, *but* memory sticks still use a FAT filesystem, so the problem may emerge when transporting files on a memory stick. That's a case to test. Greg, I once tried writing all my project scripts in Python. Ultimately I got sick of it and reverted to csh. But for the a-bit-more-than-a-script problems that Schorsh is talking about, Python is an enormous help, making the development process faster and less error-prone. Compared to any shell, Python makes it easier to write correct code. Compared to C, python is far more concise, making coding much faster, which is why we don't just use C instead. And, truly, it does not impose the formal requirements that Java or C++ does. I wish you would give it another look before deciding it's hopeless. And back to work with me. Randolph
_______________________________________________ Radiance-dev mailing list Radiance-dev@radiance-online.org http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
