[no subject]

From: scot <scot -at- HCI -dot- COM -dot- AU>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 15:58:00 +1100

>file names that look like.

> mytool.process_id.month.day.year

>Which is the "extension"? A UNIX program can as easily use '_C' as an
>as it can use '.c'. For this reason, at least on UNIX it is a good idea to
> the
>'.' explicit. On DOS and Windows this is not so important (because of the
> formal

Umm, a lot of unix programs still have the idea of an extension embedded,
e.g. gzip by default whacks .gz on files, tar -- .tar (of course meaning you
often end up with filename-is-very-long.with.funny-name.tar.gz) ...

I agree however with your assesment, always include the . DOT. In fact if
its for a UNIX system I'd say 'files that end with .ext' or at least
somewhere explain what you mean by _extension_, as in the case of gzipped
tar files, it will have two (or more).

Also, Windows95 complicates things somewhat, because now you can have a file
called filename-is-very-long.with.funny-name.tar.gz , and what's worse,
spaces are OK too.

ciao, scot

HCI Consulting, GPO Box 4846 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia.
#include std.disclaimer

Previous by Author: [no subject]
Next by Author: Comma splices
Previous by Thread: FW: Email address
Next by Thread: Help Authoring Tool for OS/2

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads