Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!rpi!pawl.rpi.edu!deven From: deven@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven Corzine) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Trashing case (Re: high-speed file transfer) Message-ID: Date: 26 Jan 89 16:30:13 GMT References: <891@io.UUCP> <212200006@s.cs.uiuc.edu> <36@snll-arpagw.UUCP> <45@snll-arpagw.UUCP> <3328@sugar.uu.net> <46@snll-arpagw.UUCP> Sender: usenet@rpi.edu Organization: RPI Public Access Workstation Lab, Troy, NY Lines: 17 In-reply-to: paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP's message of 25 Jan 89 15:47:11 GMT I don't see what makes this so difficult to understand. The answer seems pretty obvious to me: first try the filename verbatim, and if it can't find the file, then do the Examine() and ExNext() calls, and find it if it is there, or return a file-not-found error. Then, if there is a NewCLI and a NEWCLI, "newcli" will find whichever happens to appear first in the directory (ambiguous, yes, but that's the price you pay for reusing names by changing case) while "NewCLI" will match "NewCLI" and "NEWCLI" will match "NEWCLI". Seems workable enough. (Granted, this would be nicer done at a lower level, preferably with some directory cacheing...) Deven -- ------- shadow@pawl.rpi.edu ------- Deven Thomas Corzine --------------------- Cogito shadow@acm.rpi.edu 2346 15th Street Pi-Rho America ergo userfxb6@rpitsmts.bitnet Troy, NY 12180-2306 (518) 272-5847 sum... In the immortal words of Socrates: "I drank what?" ...I think.