On 11 Jan 2005 at 18:19, Marcel Kilgus wrote: > Default could also be DATAD$ or whatever.
that would defeat the wholme exercice. Why not have the user set the default? (...) > > Hm, the meaning of a Trap #3 depends on a specific device you've > opened, not a good choice IMO. But if you do use a #1 or #2 trap there > will be no way to maintain QDOS compatibility (not that I'm > particularly bothered by that, just mentioning it). See my other email (starting a job from a trap?) (...) > As I said, I think if we/you are going ahead with this, I think it > should probably be a "current directory" functionality with functions > like "up one directory" and "change directory to x (absolute and > relative). > Or perhaps both? On other systems Applications get 2 things: a current > directory and the complete name of their EXE file. OK, this bears thinking about. (...) > > Don't see why (and as said, a "current directory" would have to be > present during the whole process anyway). We're talking about a few > bytes here. Ok, I hadn't envisaged the current dir as such. > Also something one should probably think about: should functions like > OPEN automatically use the "current directory" if no drive name is > given? Currently most commands default to DATAD$. > I HATE the open commands that append the data/prog dir when I don't want them! But I'm probably alone with that opinion. > Or, speaking completely into the blue, what about a meta device like > DEV_ that uses dynamic paths instead of static ones? Something like > "home_MyDataFile"? Too ambitious? Wolfgang ---------------------------------------- www.scp-paulet-lenerz.com _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
