Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!husc6!think!news!garyo
From: garyo@prometheus.think.com (Gary Oberbrunner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: AmigaDos vs Unix wildcards/pathnames
Message-ID: <GARYO.89Mar21143919@prometheus.think.com>
Date: 21 Mar 89 19:39:19 GMT
References: <352@sagpd1.UUCP> <6294@cbmvax.UUCP> <11242@ut-emx.UUCP> <45@xenlink.UUCP> <3645@sugar.hackercorp.com> <11038@well.UUCP>
Sender: news@think.UUCP
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge Mass., USA
Lines: 33
In-reply-to: ewhac@well.UUCP's message of 21 Mar 89 10:26:06 GMT


Leo writes:

> (even with a wildcard expander in a shared library, you still have to
>  write code to call it).

Well yes, but so do you with normal arg parsing.  I mean, how many
different forms of 

(for arg = *argv; argc > 0; argc--, arg++)
	if (<arg is a file>)
	   <process the file>;
	else
	   ... blah blah blah...

have you seen in your life?  Dozens at least, I'd bet.

Besides, a shared library wildcard routine can be patched out to
suit the user's preferences, unlike a shell which has to be rewritten.
Not to mention that local wildcards can be expanded over any name space,
if done right.

Just MHO, my 2 cents worth.
--
					As always,

					Gary

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember,		      Truth is not beauty;	    Gary  Oberbrunner
Information is not knowledge; Beauty is not love;  {ames,harvard}!think!garyo
Knowledge is not wisdom;      Love is not music;	      garyo@think.com
Wisdom is not truth;	      Music is the best. - FZ	  (617) 876-1111 x265