::Well, file extensions is questionable. In MS-DOS and
relatives, these are
::very severely misused. On a Macintosh, they're hidden from the user, and all
::nice and neat. Until you want to change something, when you regret that it's
::all hidden. In Linux, there are no extensions as far as the system is
::concerned, and I must say, I don't miss them at all.
Shure, every Unix program starts with the riddle how to read a
file, and whats in it. This is maybe one of the reasons why it
took such a long time until some level has been reached. And
why a X configuration is still some kind of lotto game.
That was one thing that seriously irked me about Apple
DOS 3.3 was the
differentiation between Applesoft, Integer BASIC and binary files. I could
understand text files being a separate file type, but *binaries*?
Because the structure is different - one is a Integer programm, using
the Integer Basic structures and tokens, the other the Applesoft
The Commodore's filetypes are silly. PRG, SEQ and
USR are all just sequential.
Only REL is truly different.
Same for Apple, but there is no difference between REL and SEQ from
the viewpoint of the system sins SEQ is just a special case of REL.
Gruss
H.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK