Hi Dave,
Well, since I passed revDeleteFolder a single "/" and it tried to delete
(w/out being able to be interrupted) the *entire* hard disk, I would say
it's less dangerous to 'roll your own'. I would expect revDeleteFolder
to take as an argument a valid path, including drive letter. For
instance I would expect:
revDeleteFolder "C:/"
to delete the C drive. I don't know why just "/" does it and I'm afraid
to test it with a null, especially since it can't be interrupted.
Anything you roll on your own can be interrupted with a control-period.
The non-interruptibility of the command is a huge issue, IMO, and one
I'm not willing to take any more chances on. I haven't looked at the
code, but as Xavier mentioned, it seems like it should be an engine
level issue, not a shell call. You are certainly welcome to use it to
your hearts content-- I won't be. Once burned, twice shy.
best,
Chipp
Dave Cragg wrote:
But I'm not entirely clear of the lesson to be learned. Is the problem
really with revDeleteFolder, or with the nature of script locals?
If we don't use revDeleteFolder, but we want to delete a folder, then
we have to roll our own routines. This can be plenty dangerous too.
So do we warn people not to use revDeleteFolder, and leave them to
their own potentially dangerous devices. Or simply warn people to be
*extremely* careful when deleting folders and check they are in fact
deleting the intended folder.
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
