29 Aug
2006
29 Aug
'06
12:27 p.m.
But, none of this answers the query of "Why file
type information
has migrated into the file name"... :> (persistent, eh? :>)
Probably because in RT-11/CPM/DOS/(most unix) there is/was no where else to
keep it (except within the main body of the file itself which would then
mean that any application that touched the file would have to be aware of
it).
To me, having "something" (IMO, *above* the
filesystem) that
tracks the "type" of a file -- for the benefit of users *of*
that file -- is a desireable adjunct *to* the OS.
There is a lot to be said for the NTFS approach of allowing any number of
file attributes to be stored along with the file (pretty much a
generalisation of the Mac "forks") and accessible to anything that "needs
to
know". But then hardly any software actually supported this feature and
copying a file could silently lose vital information.
[though, having made these arguments, I am building support
for that mechanism *within* my OS -- since it is a key service
that all apps *must* use, in my case :< ]
Yep, I think we agree more than we
disagree - but a polite public argument
can always be a pleasant relaxation.
I'm just amused by the way that 30+ years after Unix drasticly simplified
the powerful Multics filesystem, most of it has been reinvented.
Now if we just added-in the automatic migration of files that George 3 had
40 years ago and automatic file generation management as ICL had then and
VAX had from its outset ...
[but then I'm drifting off your topic, again]
[and I've no idea why my ISP's mail server decided to flag your message as
SPAM!]
Andy