On 7 Mar 2007, at 16:03, Richard Gaskin wrote:
FWIW, I think the rename command is just fine exactly as it is. It
lets you rename any part of a file's complete path name, which
metaphorically may also change the "location" of the file (for
whatever that really means in the bowels of a file system). It's
simple to use and quite robust.
And I also find it convenient that it will faithfully execute even
when another file already exists at that location, since we have
the "exists" function and "there is" operators to make a
determination in cases where we may need to do something different.
That said, I agree that it should be considered an error of
omission that the overwriting behavior is not included in the docs.
Which leads us to this central question:
Dave, what is the Bugzilla number for the request you filed for
this suggestion?
That will let us vote for it, so it'll help those of us who agree
with you to better support your desire for this change.
I can't log on to BZ to report at the moment!
Actually I don't really mind if "rename" stays as is as long as the
docs are updated. However it's really swings and roundabouts, since
you can just as easily use deleteFile and rename to achieve the same
thing.
However, I really do think that:
revMoveFile
revMoveFolder (already exists)
revRenameFile
revRenameFolder
as well as a full set "rev" prefixed file functions should be added,
these should perform the correct level of checking.
All the Best
Dave
_______________________________________________
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
