Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!itsgw!rpi!pawl.rpi.edu!deven From: deven@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven Corzine) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Wild Cards, file syntax (was: arp CD command change???) Message-ID: Date: 20 Feb 89 02:09:07 GMT References: <8902131846.AA21527@postgres.Berkeley.EDU> <35960@bbn.COM> <5985@cbmvax.UUCP> Sender: usenet@rpi.edu Organization: RPI Public Access Workstation Lab, Troy, NY Lines: 80 In-reply-to: higgin@cbmvax.UUCP's message of 16 Feb 89 14:14:41 GMT In article <5985@cbmvax.UUCP> higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (Paul Higginbottom MKT) writes: >In article deven@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven Corzine) writes: >$I still find some definite problems with the AmigaDOS method of file >$system structuring. I find "." and ".." far easier to use >$effectively, even if they are more to type. "" as current directory >$is obnoxious, if you ask me. > >As someone else mentioned; it's mainly a question of what you're used to. >It's a fairly easy translation: > > UNIX AmigaDOS > .. / > > . "" > > / : > >My only problem with "" and : is that they're shifted characters which is >harder to type (for me). First off, . to "" is NOT such a simple translation, because shells won't usually pass the quotes without quoting THEM. I see : vs. / for root as more of a preference issue, but I prefer /. I don't like / for the parent directory. It's just weird. But that's preference, as well. Matt Dillon argues that "/" is much easier to type for parent directory. That may be, but going back more than one directory is fairly uncommon in my experience, and I'd rather use "../file" than "/file" to refer to a file in the parent directory. It is clearer and less prone to error. (Accidental keybounce on the /, etc...) >$There is no easy equivilent for "./file" under AmigaDOS... > >This is surely rather unimportant as the current directory is usually >searched FIRST anyway. Unimportant, hell. *Maybe* I don't WANT to have the current directory searched first. Did you ever consider that? The AmigaDOS path is hardcoded to search the current directory first, and C: last. Yes, various shells will do their own path searching for you, but they are usually overlaid on a CLI or AmigaShell, and often use the AmigaDOS path if the internal path fails. And yes, you could specify "" for the current directory in the path specification, but you never know for sure where quotes will and won't be stripped and by what rules. "." is never simply dropped into never-never land as "" can easily be. Also, for the record, you CAN use "" under Unix to refer to the current directory. If you really want to. >$I don't understand at all the objection to Unix wildcards. > >Neither do I, except I find "." files obnoxious, i.e., "*" doesn't >match them so to clean out a directory with some files which start with >. you have to do "rm * .*" (don't you?). Under Unix, "*" normally does not match files which begin with a "." by convention. It's a special case. ("dot" files are considered "invisible" files) So the Unix shells normally don't match dot files unless specifically requested to by ".*" or some such. It's a safety mechanism to protect you from accidentally deleting files you may not want to. Again, Unix is designed such that you can easily replace the shell, which is not so trivial a task on the Amiga. Also, the fact that most Amiga shells run under a CLI is a horrible kludge in my book. >$Next time, please get your facts straight before flaming as fine an >$operating system as Unix is. Or hold your flames. > >Settle down (do I smell religion?). Oh, only a little religion. It's mostly this "Unix couldn't match *.REL so it sucks" sort of crap that bugs me. It is just such a gross misrepresentation that it disgusts me. > Paul. 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.