From: "Spiro Trikaliotis"; on Saturday, April 13, 2013; at 2:13 AM -0400 > * On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 04:07:47AM +0000, William Levak wrote: >> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013, silverdr wrote: > >>>> "0:?*" is only necessary if you got a "file not found" error, >>>> where the next load might try to load from the non-existant drive 1. >> > >> >Wouldn't, in such case, a "0:*" still be sufficient? >> >> Since you have previously referenced a file, "*" now means last file >> referenced. > > Have you actually tested that? > > Yes, you are right, "*" references the last file. However, silverdr told > you to use "0:*", which does NOT reference the last accessed file, but > the first file on drive 0. > > We tried to explain this to you more than once. > > BTW: EVen your first argument does not hold. If you try to load a file > that does not exist, and afterwards, you try to load "*", you get the > first file (again). William seems to be confused about what the DOS actually tests. When the DOS wants to know whether or not a programmer wants the "last openned file", it looks at the _entire_ string; it doesn't examine _only_ the file-name. The two strings "*" and "0:*" have the same file-name (pattern) _inside_ them; but, the first character in each _entire_ string is different. In the first string, the initial character is a punctuation mark; in the second string, the initial character is a digit. That is what the DOS sees -- the _very first_ character, in the second string, isn't an asterisk; therefore, that string doesn't say, "most recently openned file". Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2013-04-13 09:00:03
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.