Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!lll-tis!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!agate!eris!bryce
From: bryce@eris (;;;;0000)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Ban the Cloud!
Message-ID: <7080@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 20 Feb 88 11:48:10 GMT
References: <882@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: bryce@eris.berkeley.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 28

In article <> c162-fe@zooey.Berkeley.EDU (Jonathan Dubman) writes:
>
>WRONG SOLUTION:  Don't put all .info files in one .info file.  That makes it
>hard to manipulate icons (like on the Mac.)  Leave it to the fast file system..

No matter how fast, having hundreds of .info files is slower than a single
".icons" file.  A single file is EXACTLY the right solution.  Fast read
even on the old slow file system, small size, low overhead, no clutter.
If there are several icons all with the same image data, it gets saved
once, not many several times.  Standard "generic" images could be kept
in the single file, for use as any icon (the generic images would be
user editable).

Just thinking of the overhead for separate .info files boggles the mind.
The overhead is about 1K** per file.  Now count all the files on your disk.
Multiply by 1K.  Subtract this from your available space.  Gack!



** Assuming 512 byte blocks.  Includes space for header.

>	Let WB fork out into different tasks...

Yes.  WB should be multitasking internally.

|\_/|  . ACK!, NAK!, EOT!, SOH!
{o o} .     Bryce Nesbitt
 (")        BIX: mleeds (temporarily)
  U	    USENET: bryce@eris.berkeley.EDU -or- ucbvax!eris!bryce