Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!agate!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpcvca!charles
From: charles@hpcvca.HP.COM (Charles Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: AmigaDos vs Unix wildcards/pathnames
Message-ID: <5660038@hpcvca.HP.COM>
Date: 17 Mar 89 00:23:06 GMT
References: <11135@ut-emx.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, Oregon
Lines: 31

> / hpcvca:comp.sys.amiga / daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie)
>> ...AmigaDOS ones don't *seem* to be well documented to for
>> the average user.  It's hard to use them without knowing them.
> That is true, or at least it used to be back in the A1000 days, when you
> didn't get an AmigaDOS manual at all with the system.

You still don't... do you?  I just bought an Amiga2000 and it did not
include an AmigaDOS manual.  It did not include several other things
that it should have so I contacted Commodore Support and was told that
the AmigaDOS is not included.

>> Which leads to what I consider the other half of the problem.
>> Making use of the full wildcarding system should be trivially
>> simple for programmers.
>> Jim Wright
> I don't think you'll get much argument on that one.  A standard library
> routine would make all pattern matching consistent, and extend it's use
> throughout the system, such as in file requesters.
> Dave Haynie

I prefer that the shell implement wild cards.  That way it is always
consistent.  It also potentially makes the commands smaller.

One thing I find irritating about the current Amiga commands is that I
cannot say:
	copy dir1/file1 dir2/files* dir3/file3 dir4
If the shell implemented wild cards, then copy would allow any number
of files and this would work.
--
	Charles Brown		charles%hpcvca@hplabs.hp.com
	Not representing my employer.