[Fred L. Drake, Jr.]
> I think we can simply declare that isreadonly() checks that the
> file doesn't allow the user to read it,
Had more in mind that the file doesn't allow the user to write it <wink>.
> but setreadonly() sounds to me like it wouldn't be portable to Unix.
> There's more than one (reasonable) way to make a file unreadable to
> a user just by manipulating permission bits, and which is best will
> vary according to both the user and the file's existing permissions.
"Portable" implies least common denominator, and the plain meaning of read-only
is that nobody (whether owner, group or world in Unix) has write permission.
People wanting something beyond that are going beyond what's portable, and
that's fine -- I'm not suggesting getting rid of chmod for Unix dweebs. But by
the same token, Windows dweebs should get some other (as non-portable as chmod)
way to fiddle the bits important on *their* OS (only one of which chmod can
affect).
Billions of newbies will delightedly stick to the portable interface with the
name that makes sense.
the-percentage-of-programmers-doing-systems-programming-shrinks-by-
the-millisecond-ly y'rs - tim
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4