The following bytes were arranged on 6 Mar 2013 by Matthew Phillips :
[snip]
> I have not looked at the unixlib code, but if it's just a matter of
> using a single 32-bit word (an off_t ?) to keep track of enumerating two
> directories independently via OS_GBPB there must be a solution which does not
> involve assuming an increase of one per file, even without going as far as
> scanning the whole directory at the outset.
I have been wondering about this, with the caveat that I also have not
looked at the UnixLib code. This is for wildcard scanning, right? Why
would it need to go backwards in those circumstances?
--
__<^>__
/ _ _ \ I don't have a problem with God; it's his fan club I can't stand.
( ( |_| ) )
\_> <_/ ======================= Martin Bazley ==========================
_______________________________________________
GCCSDK mailing list gcc@gccsdk.riscos.info
Bugzilla: http://www.riscos.info/bugzilla/index.cgi
List Info: http://www.riscos.info/mailman/listinfo/gcc
Main Page: http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCCSDK
No comments:
Post a Comment