Tony Firshman wrote: > The QL sub-directory implementation in most QL systems is better than > nothing but is not good. What a pity *true* sub-directories were not > possible. That is where DOS and successors really win. What a struggle > it is copying file systems, and one often hits the length limit. > > On my BBS I have many obscure directory names for that very reason.
QL-HD had true subdirectories and special tricks so the applications could be made to only see a portion of the path, on order not to confuse them. I might be wrong, but if I remember correctly, it was possible to overcome the length limit by walking through the subdirectories. The working directory was job specific, so one wouldn't confuse other jobs by this. Unfortunately it seems to me that Dirk worked toward the "usual" implementation for compatibility reasons, and the driver I could make from his latest experimental sourcecode seems to behave different to his public releases. I'll try to have a closer look someday. Peter _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
