Re: [cc65] Common macros for dirent.d_type

From: Groepaz <>
Date: 2012-07-06 19:03:20
On Friday 06 July 2012, you wrote:
> Hi Groepaz,
> > how is PRG cbm specific? and why would SEQ be better? they are *exactly
> > the same* - except for that one byte in the directory that makes it SEQ
> > or PRG
> > 
> >> Maybe I'm missing an important point but from the arguments I
> >> understand so far the decision seem easy to me.
> > 
> > point: PRG is used in most cases. there is no backdraw in using prg.
> > 
> > did someone already add to the confusion that SEQ files usually are
> > expected to contain petscii text, not arbitrary dats? =P
> Okay, trying to summarize what I've learned so far: There's basically
> not functional difference between SEQ and PRG. _Programatically_
> everything can be done with everyone. It's all _only_ about human
> perception - correct?

not only. as said before, tons of other programs create and expect PRG files 
for data. SEQ is usually a plain text file, not something like a bitmap or 
sprites (for example). so it doesnt make a difference - unless you go outside 
cc65 world.

and to add to what andre wrote:

if there is a default type, it should be used for opening existing files too - 
explicitly that is. because there may very well be two files with the same 
name, but different type in the directory:

20 "foo" PRG
10 "foo" SEQ

is perfectly valid, and nicely breaks the "SEQ is default but opening will 
open any file anyway" thing =)


IBM is not a necessary evil. IBM is not necessary. 
<Ted Nelson>

To unsubscribe from the list send mail to with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Fri Jul 6 19:02:32 2012

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2012-07-06 19:02:36 CEST