On 8/28/2012 08:46 Rony G. Flatscher said:
> On 28.08.2012 13:02, Michael Lueck wrote:
>> Chip Davis wrote:
>>> SysFileTree() otoh, was never intended for interactive use and is more
>>> accurately regarded as a application interface to the file system.
>> <snip>
>>
>>> IMHO, of course.
>> So was that a +1 for my RFE?
> Hmm, only after reading this did I conclude that I could do a +1 on your RFE 
> right there at:
> <https://sourceforge.net/p/oorexx/feature-requests/482/>.
>
> Just did that and saw that you yourself had not done that vote up.

I had not bumped the RFE because I wanted to initiate a discussion 
about the implementation of it, first.  Specifically, Michael 
suggested a flag to indicate that every file should be returned.

My point was that "return every file" should be the default behavior, 
and that the interface could use flags, RE's, wildcards, arguments, or 
whatever, to indicate something less than every file was desired.

I know the "backwards compatibility" argument will be raised, but the 
current behavior is not consistent across all filesystems now.  The 
only reasonable default behavior is for SysFileTree() to return all 
the files it can see on whatever filesystem it is scanning.

I have now bumped this RFE, primarily to encourage someone to look at 
the issue.  I would prefer that the solution suggested by the RFE not 
be the way it is implemented.

-Chip-


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel

Reply via email to