Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!apple!portal!sv!daven
From: daven@svc.portal.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: stdio, THINK C and APPLs
Message-ID: <1991Jan7.224021.9163@svc.portal.com>
Date: 7 Jan 91 22:40:21 GMT
References: <640.2783DEFA@busker.fidonet.org>
Organization: Software Ventures
Lines: 31

In article <640.2783DEFA@busker.fidonet.org> Steve.Dorner@f20.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Steve Dorner) writes:
>Reply-To: dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu
>
>In article <1990Dec24.182548.17958@svc.portal.com> daven@svc.portal.com writes:
>>>If the data fork assumption is correct, is this The Way It Should Be?  How
>>This is The Way It Should Be!
>
>Horse puppies!
>
>It would be easy enough to add another file "mode" to fopen (and another
>flag bit to open), to give you the choice of data or resource forks.  I wonder
>why the library writers don't do it?

Well that hardly keeps within the spirit of portable C code, which is what
I thought the moaning was all about. If you modify FOpen to have a new
mode, then it's hardly portable.

Opening a resource fork is a Mac OS specific function, and does not make
sense on any other machine. Thus, use the Mac OS call to do this, that's
what it's there for. Additionally, there's two ways to open a resource a
resource - one as a just a plain file (dangerous!, very dangerous! unless
you're planning on copying another entire resource fork over the one you
just opened) - the other is where you open as an active resource fork
and let the Resource Manager have told control over it's contents.


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Dave Newman              |  daven@svc.portal.com        |  AppleLink: D0025
   Sofware Ventures Corp.   |  AOL: MicroPhone             |  CIS: 76004,2161
   Berkeley, CA  94705      |  WELL: tinman@well.sf.ca.us  |  (415) 644-3232