Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!att!news.cs.indiana.edu!cica!ogre!burleigh From: burleigh@ogre.cica.indiana.edu (Frank Burleigh) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer Subject: Re: Building a better DOS revisisted (getting close to UNIX) Message-ID: Date: 24 Jun 91 06:05:10 GMT References: <0094A761.C2F6D640@MAPLE.CIRCA.UFL.EDU> <13597@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <2815@nemesis.stsci.edu> Sender: news@cica.indiana.edu (News System) Organization: Indiana University Lines: 21 Nntp-Posting-Host: ogre.cica.indiana.edu In <2815@nemesis.stsci.edu> roberts@stsci.EDU (Jim Roberts) writes: >In article <13597@pt.cs.cmu.edu> ralf+@cs.cmu.edu (Ralf Brown) writes: >>No it won't, because DOS has always accepted either forward or backslashes >>in pathnames. It converts them to backslashes internally, but accepts >>either, just like it accepts filenames in either upper or lowercase. >Not DOS 4.0x, which ruinously accepts only backslashes. I'm about to >install 5.0. I suspect there is no improvement, but there hasn't been >a posting in it yet here. It's a good idea to check out general >assertions. i think ralf means that dos *functions* accept either fore or back slashes. they do indeed. for me, dos 4.01 at the command line won't accept '/' as it thinks that's a switch. natch. -- Frank Burleigh burleigh@cica.cica.indiana.edu USENET: ...rutgers!iuvax!cica!burleigh BITNET: BURLEIGH@IUBACS.BITNET Department of Sociology, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405