Re: DOS LFN support
jbrown wrote:
> On 0, Juergen Luethje <jluethje at gmx.de> wrote:
>> jbrown105 wrote:
>>> On 0, Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
>>>> Juergen Luethje writes:
<snip>
>> I would appreciate it very much, if in *all* Euphoria routines that deal
>> with filenames, ex.exe uses long filenames, if they are supported by the
>> OS. The code needed for this purpose is *not* contained in dos.e.
>> Most of the code in dos.e add new functions to Euphoria (like mkdir(),
>> rmdir(), copy(), ...) rather than improving existing functions.
>>
>
> Ah I see. I do believe our lib adds these as well, but on the other hand
> this is not what you're trying to extract (from our lib).
Yep.
>> (I assume Rob knows dos.e well. If dos.e would solve the problem, Rob
>> would already have moved it's code into the interpreter, I suppose.)
>>
>> And dos.e is buggy. Just an example: When a DOS program deals with long
>> filenames, the most basic thing is to detect, wether the OS on which the
>> program currently is running, does support long filenames or doesn't do
>> so. Do detect this, dos.e uses "surrogate markers", which are not too
>> reliable. Using this method, a program wouldn't have long filename
>> support on Win XP. 
>> To look wether LFN are supported by the OS, my code calls the appropriate
>> DOS interrupt function instead, which is much more reliable.
>>
>
> Ah I see. Just curious, what is a "surrogate marker" ? <snip>
Sorry, probably I better should have written "indirect indicator" or so.
The expression "surrogate marker" is used in biomedical research.
Often the parameter of interest cannot be measured directly, and then
a surrogate marker for the parameter of interest is measured, for
example blood flow in a brain region as a surrogate marker for
task-specific functional activation.
Sometimes, the surrogate marker is not a valid representative of the
parameter of interest. This leads to misapprehensions.
Regards,
Juergen
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
