Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!efi!tim
From: tim@efi.com (Tim Maroney)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: How to Openresfile -- Actually on IDs (file and directory)
Message-ID: <1990Jun29.181522.22717@efi.com>
Date: 29 Jun 90 18:15:22 GMT
References: <13401@unix.SRI.COM> <1990Jun25.180531.532@efi.com> <1990Jun28.173027.18044@agate.berkeley.edu>
Organization: Electronics For Imaging, Inc.
Lines: 49

Recently tim@efi.com (Tim Maroney) said:
>>With System 7.0 on the way, I think it's time to re-open this question
>>of the usefulness of file IDs.  I have recently discovered a case which
>>shows that even the use of directory ids to store paths is a bad idea.
>[...]
>>Since I'm modifying MacApp, when I have problems, it makes sense to
>>see if the problem also happens on an unmodified MacApp.  So I keep a
>>folder of virgin sources with my folder of modified sources.  Sometimes
>>I switch the two, by using the Finder's folder renaming feature, to
>>test under virgin conditions.

In article <1990Jun28.173027.18044@agate.berkeley.edu> lippin@math.berkeley.edu
writes:
>And then you use the "Make" command to rebuild?  No, the make command
>would see that the already compiled code is newer than the sources you
>slipped in, and do nothing.  Instead, you used your knowledge of the
>internals of the application to force it to forget everything it knew
>about the contents of the files.  (I imagine you used "Remove
>Objects.")  Yes, I do the same thing.  But I wouldn't count on it
>working in any application, and I wouldn't consider it an obvious
>technique.

You are incorrect.  There is no need to "Remove Objects".  I have just
checked this (as you could have done rather than making false
assumptions).  The THINK Pascal application is intelligent enough to
figure out that the file it compiled before is not the same as the file
that now has that name, using the date on the file.

And yes, I do consider it an obvious technique to switch objects by
switching their names.  I've observed people doing this for years.
Switching folders is one way; and even more common way is, as I said,
renaming a file to "Old <file name>" and then copying over a new
version from another volume (floppy disk or network volume, usually)
and calling it "<file name>".  I think it strains credibility to say
that this is not an obvious technique -- do you ever watch users?; it
is an obvious technique that will not work if file ids are used.

>To me, using tricks like this depends on a misstep common among
>programmers: "the name is the object."  This appears to be less
>common, although not entirely absent, among non-techno-geeks.*  Few
>think that by naming their kid George Bush, they can make him
>president.

I don't see what relevance this personal attack has, since I'm not a
techno-geek.  I'm a transplanted humanities type.  However, if the
personal attack is removed, the paragraph seems to be left with very
little meaning.  I think that most people are quite aware that if the
school keeps records on their children, and the names of the children
are switched, then one will wind up with the others' grades.