On woensdag, sep 3, 2003, at 02:44 Europe/Brussels, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Message: 2
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 07:34:02 +1000
Subject: Re: The Directory Walker revisited
From: David Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


On Tuesday, Sep 2, 2003, at 22:19 Australia/Brisbane, wouter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

snip

Now directories nested 1000 deep seems unusual.

That is true but the amount of recursion is not equal to the depth of the directories.

That rather depends on whether you are using pre-, end- or post-order
processing within the recursion. Walking the entire breadth and depth
of the directory tree before processing any data would be a bit unusual.

Yes but that is precisely what will make the recursive handlers meet their limit if it a directory tree is a really wide and/ or deep. It is the amount of recursion that counts. It is not realy a question of the "possibility" of using recursive handlers on directories (the answer will be yes up to the recursionLimit). The question is : are recursive handlers efficient enough to be used for this kind of work if they can bump into a recursionLimit before ending their task.
Personally I like recursive handlers and will use them if possible, but not in this case.



It is equal to the total amount of directories. And this number can
easily surpass 1000.

I did not see the actual walker which started this thread but I and
http://www.sonsothunder.com/devres/metacard/tips/file007.htm

others have posted recursive walkers "years" ago which used a
depth-first search with pre- or end-order processing, and have not hit
these limits. As Dar suggests, I doubt they would have any problem
processing an entire OS X volume.

I have been searching for this recursive walkers from "years" ago but couldn't find those with "depth-first search with pre- or end-order processing". Can you please post the url.
The other recursive ones are "all" bumping into the recursionLimit. Except one you mentioned at :
http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-revolution/2002-May/004353.html
which points to Ben Rubinstein's directory walking function. Which is not a real recursive handler, but a repeat loop buried in a function. Only this script as it is, will not work and has to be corrected.


regards
David

Greetings WA

_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Reply via email to