Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 15:08:00 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Mark Habersack <grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Reply-To: grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: 1 bug(?) open/readdir & glob
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960918152434.1273L-100000@is>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.95.960918150302.561C-100000@ananke.amu.edu.pl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Wed, 18 Sep 1996, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>
>On Wed, 18 Sep 1996, Mark Habersack wrote:
>
>> Frankly, I don't see why a program might suffer from seeing hid/sys
>> files? 
>
>Because `findfirst' by default doesn't bring the hidden files, and people 
>tend to think about `readdir' as a substitute for `findfirst'.  If a 
>program doesn't expect to get files that it cannot change, it might 
>break.
But again, do people that use findfirst/next will use readdir()?
findfirst/next are DOS-specific and are used only in this environment. If
someone tries to write code for Unix without earlier experience, h/she should
expect some differences in some functions and read the docs carefully.
I think that Unix specific routines ported to DOS should behave exactly as
they do in their native environment (you tried to mimic stat
features unsupported by DOS as much as possible Eli, is that right? This is
the right thing to do and I think it should be done for all Unix functions).

**********************************************************************
So if you ask me how do I feel inside, I could honestly tell you we've
been taken on a very long ride. And if my owners let me have free time
some day, with all good intention I would probably run away!
Clutching the short straw...
******************* http://ananke.amu.edu.pl/~grendel ****************