Re: getOpenFileName Bug???
On 28 Aug 2002, at 9:06, Derek Parnell wrote:
>
> You actually want a user to to select all of them at the same time?
>
> Well let's do some quick guesses...
> 12,379 (call it 13,000) times 20 bytes per name = 260,000 bytes, plus the
> path
> name to the folder (256) is about 261,000 bytes. So I guess 8000 bytes doesn't
> cut it, eh?
>
> It begs the questions as to why one would want to have that many files in a
> single folde anyhow. I'm sure there are better organisational solutions to the
> one you are currently using. But what would I know :)
They were on the httpd in a single folder, and when the web miner cut loose
on them, it also stored them in one folder. I have since written a program (in
Eu, of course) to move them to 25 alphabetical folders, because trying to
select and move them in Exploder wasn't working. So there are fewer per
directory now, but it's still a huge number.
Kat
> ----------------
> cheers,
> Derek Parnell
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kat" <gertie at PELL.NET>
> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 7:47 AM
> Subject: Re: getOpenFileName Bug???
>
>
> > On 28 Aug 2002, at 7:00, Derek Parnell wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Brian is correct. The original routine only catered for a single
> path/file
> > > name to be returned. When it was updated to support multiple files
> names,
> > > the buffer size was not changed. I'll increase it 8000 bytes. This
> should do for
> > > nearly all cases.
> >
> >
> > I have a folder with 12,379 files in it. Any chance you can accomodate
> that?
> >
> > Kat
> >
> >
>
>
>
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
