Re: Interpretation of extensions different from Unix/Linux?

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:50:56 -0500, Randy Brukardt wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message 

>> That is certainly true. This is why I said that Ada.Directories is almost
>> unusable. It cannot serve the purpose of searching a file system. The
>> negligible rest is:
>>
>> 1. copy, delete files by name;
>> 2. get modification time;
>> 3. create directory;
> 
> You forgot:
> 
> 4. search within a known directory.

Under the assumption of directories known to the application, there is no
need to search them. Typically an application either maintains its files
and so "knows" them up to the Exits test, or it knows nothing.

> And I don't consider any of these things "negligible". The Janus/Ada 
> compiler depends heavily on the first two, and it is nice that we finally 
> can get away from using non-portable kludges to get that information.

A compiler is a very specific kind of application.

> We tried anyway, and of course we got very limited results. And we'll try to 
> extend them, and we'll still have operations of very limited use. If you 
> need them perfect for a given OS, you *have* to write them yourself.

We need them reasonable working. "Perfect" may attribute an implementation.
But the problem now is lack of functionality. Once the functionality is
present, we could talk about perfection.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de