Author: Ed Panek
Date: 08:39:21 05/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 23, 2002 at 16:03:11, Christophe Theron wrote: >On May 23, 2002 at 11:15:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 23, 2002 at 01:31:56, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >> >>>On May 23, 2002 at 01:16:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On May 22, 2002 at 22:08:45, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>Filenames are case sensitive in Windows only for storing. When searching for >>>>>filenames, the search is case insensitive. That's the best way to do it in my >>>>>opinion. >>>> >>>> >>>>Not in mine. I want WCCCxxxx to mean something significant, since WCCC is >>>>obviously an abbreviation for something. wcccxxxx should (to me) be a >>>>different file. Otherwise, _why_ would I name one WCCCxxxx and the other >>>>wcccxxxx and expect them to be the same? Why not just type them the same >>>>and it works. IE if you don't like case-sensitive filenames, simply make >>>>all your filenames lowercase and the problem is instantly solved, but >>>>leaving the rest of us the option of using case sensitivity to do whatever >>>>we want... >>> >>>He's not talking about saving a file with different case. If a filesystem can >>>do that, great. But when you're _searching_ for a file, you should be able to >>>search for "wccc..." and see a list with _both_ sets of files. That is what >>>Christophe is saying, and it makes way more sense to do it this way. >> >> >>This is already trivial to do using regular expressions. Or anybody could >>write their own "find" command that is case insensitive. I did this inside >>Crafty to match GM/IM names to adjust how crafty behaves. And I found it >>tedious to try to match strange combinations of upper and lower case letters, >>so I simply mapped them all to lowercase _first_... >> >>But in Unix, if you are looking for files or strings in files, it is trivial >>to make it case insensitive already. Just study "regular expressions"... > > > >And here we get a good understanding of one of the problems that will keep Linux >away from mainstream (and that's a pity). > >The file matching convention is user unfriendly (convince yourself by making a >poll here for example), and the proposed solution for this problem is even more >unfriendly (regular expressions, how am I going to explain that to my mother - >she just wants to do word processing and email). > >That's all the Linux philosophy in a snapshot. It's just an example, but you can >repeat the same pattern for many features of the OS. > >Normal people care more about useability than about features. > >But not Linux users/developpers. Linux users/developpers care more about >features than about useability. > >The result is a clear success: the stuff is unuseable for normal people. And >Linuxers like it: normal people are a threat to the philosophy. They might >demand stupid things, like being able to retrieve a file called "WCCCxxx" by >just typing "wccc*". Geez! > >Time for new blood to kick in and reconsider some basic things... There is a >huge potential in Linux. > > > > Christophe Christophe, I agree. I speak to endusers (even smart MD types!) and for them Unix and Linux is intimidating and foreign. Having streetpeople use vi is dangerous and sometimes funny. Compare looking in both a Windows or a Unix based OS for a file called "startAppletalk" for an enduser to change and the Windows based system will be much easier to do and more intuitive for average Joes than Unix/Linux (vi takes a 2 page document for streetpeople). Not to say Unix isnt the betterr OS...it is... but ask yourself this: How suprised would you be to see an 80 year old woman in a basic Windows class....how about a basic Unix class!!?? Ed
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.