Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!quintus!pds
From: pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Feeping Creaturism
Message-ID: <711@sandino.quintus.UUCP>
Date: 29 Feb 88 19:25:38 GMT
References: <8802250823.AA09003@cory.Berkeley.EDU>
Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
Lines: 28
Summary: What we need is a richer file system

In article <8802250823.AA09003@cory.Berkeley.EDU>, dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
>  But suppose
> :it were easy to move it into and out of IFF.  And further suppose that the
> :IFF file were maintained in a compressed form.
> 
> 	I used to set my tabs to 4 in VI (on my UNIX account). (I *like*
> 	using the TAB key).
> 
> 	It is quite easy to expand them to spaces before sending them to a
> 	printer (expand -4 file).
> 
> 	I no longer have my tabs set to 4 in VI.

Yea, I know what you mean.  This is one of the reasons I hate SCCS.  And
I guess what I'm proposing is kind of like SCCS, in that respect.  What
we really need is a file system that is smart enough to recognize
alternate file storage techniques, and expand the files when they are
opened (or as they're read), and squeeze them as they're written.
Someone mentioned the concept of an object-oriented operating system
here a while ago.  That's what we need:  each file can supply it's own
procedures for opening it, getting bytes from it, writing to it, etc.
And it could supply special procedures, like to get the next C token....

Just musing....
-- 
-Peter Schachte
pds@quintus.uucp
...!sun!quintus!pds