On 3/15/07, Mike Krell <mbk.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > Here is a point of confusion. Bear in mind I'm running this under > windows, so explorer happily reports that ".emacs" has a type of > "emacs". (In windows, file types are registered in the system based > on the extension -- all the characters following the last dot. An > unregistered extension is listed as its own type. Thus files ending > in .txt are listed as type "Text Document", but files ending in > ".emacs" are listed as type "emacs" because it's an unregistered > extension.) Unix-derived files prepended with a dot (like .emacs) are not meant to be interpreted as a "file type". It may be useful on occasion when using windows, but it certainly is not the intent of a dotfile. The following files reside in my /tmp: .X0-lock .X100-lock .X101-lock .X102-lock .X103-lock .X104-lock .X105-lock .X106-lock .X11-unix .X99-lock ...which are certainly not all unnamed files of different type. > I often sort files in the explorer based on type, and I want a file > and all its backups to appear next to each other in such a sorted > list. That's exactly why I rename the files the way I do. > Thus, ".1.emacs" is what I want, and ".emacs.1" is a markedly inferior > and unacceptable alternative. That's what I'm referring to by > extension preservation. Unacceptable? You code fails in (ISTM) the more common case of an extensionless file. -Mike
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