 | | Re: Testing long filenames was Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)?
|
|
(...) (URL) on Win2000 SP4 w. (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Testing long filenames was Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)?
|
|
(...) My best guess is at that time MS was trying to make things safe for old programs (although it seems senseless for them to have done this with Win32 apps). If you call the Win32 function GetLongPathName on the short path, it will give you the (...) (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Testing long filenames was Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)?
|
|
(...) That was command line, (URL) the result with drag n drop> is similar. ROSCO (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)? (Was: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!)
|
|
(...) Yeah I know they can be included but it's usually a safe idea not to. When setting a standard I'd be wary of allowing anything that is commonly poorly interpreted (which I suspect the escaped characters are). Tim (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Testing long filenames was Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)?
|
|
(...) Thanks, Well well, first advantage of downgrading to XP, I guess. Just to be sure, you did drag and drop into the "application", or did you write it in a command line? /Tore (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Testing long filenames was Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)?
|
|
(...) (URL) Here's> the output on XP. ROSCO (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Testing long filenames was Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)?
|
|
(...) Well, I made a small program in Delphi 7 that lists the command line parameters, drag and dropped a file named "LongFileName.dat" in it, and here is the surprising result: (URL) (Running on a Win98SE PC.) So I think long file names still has (...) (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)? (Was: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!)
|
|
(...) The only character either Linux or Mac OS X is allergic to is '/'. Spaces are perfectly acceptable under both. One need only take care that any paths fed to the shell are properly escaped. Ideally anybody writing shell scripts or system() (...) (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)? (Was: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!)
|
|
(...) With tongue slightly in cheek, I believe it is time to accept the technological advancements of 1984. If DOS wasn't obsolete the day it was written, it definitely was within a few years. DOS filenames tend to be inscrutable, and there just (...) (17 years ago, 2-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial directory (with non-standard name lenght)? (Was: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!)
|
|
(...) First of all, I agree that we should avoid using space in filenames for all official stuff. It's just too problematic. However, that's not a reason to forbid the use of long filenames in general. The thing is, any program that doesn't support (...) (17 years ago, 1-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
