Me too! I really couldn't believe it when it actually deleted the
file though. I test everything to do with files *throughly* on a
separate system, cos you can't trust the documents and some of the
commands do some *really* strange things and not what their names
imply at all!
I just can't see how the original programmers thought processes
worked on this one. Lets make a command called "rename" that can be
used as a "move" command and allow it to delete the destination file.
Why? What possible reason could there be for this? Especially since
there are commands already that specifically delete files. Then to
not let the person that was doing documentation know that it could
overwrite files? What's that all about? It's just beyond me!
Take Care
All the Best
Dave
On 6 Mar 2007, at 17:31, Stephen Barncard wrote:
I'm sure glad that rev gives us the primitives so we can check for
overwriting ourselves. Sometimes we want to.
However it doesn't say *anything* about overwriting files!
--
stephen barncard
s a n f r a n c i s c o
- - - - - - - - - - - -
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
