Re: [cc65] Filenames for POSIX functins on CBM targets

Hi,

>>    For example
>>    open("8#0:name", ...
>
> Note that open("#0", ...) is perfectly legal for the 1541 (opening a
> specific buffer).
>
> Thus, using the "#" is not completely unproblematic.

Again - I was introducing '#' into the discussion by mistake. I
intended to discuss ':' only.

> The double colon syntax proposes elsewhere is also not unproblematic.
>
> Look at the following syntaxes:
> - 8:0:name

This would mean unit 8 drive 0.

> - 8:@0:name (yes, overwrite-with-at is problematic, I know...)

This would mean unit 8 and te rest would behave in the same way
"@0:name" would behave today.

> - 8:@name

This would mean unit 8 and te rest would behave in the same way
"@name" would behave today.

> Also: devices 0 and 1 normally do not exist on the IEC bus; however,
> screen (0) and tape (1) are valid targets for open(), too, aren't they?
> Thus, distinguishing between device and drive in "n:name" with n < 2 or
> not is not an option, either.

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly but after having learned
that there may be very well more than two drives I already modified my
proposal:

n:name always means unit n. In order to specify a drive it is
obligatory to specify a unit first like in n:m:name meaning unit n
drive m.

Regards,
Oliver
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.