home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.arch
- Path: sparky!uunet!UB.com!quack!dfox
- From: dfox@quack.sac.ca.us (David Fox)
- Subject: Re: Comparison of Alpha, MIPS and PA-RISC-II wanted
- Message-ID: <fW0DHHa@quack.sac.ca.us>
- Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
- References: <1992Dec20.164501.291@rlgsc.com> <1992Dec21.194657.759@qb.rhein-main.de>
- Date: 23 Dec 1992 16:44:55 UTC
- Lines: 30
-
- In article <1992Dec21.194657.759@qb.rhein-main.de> vhs@rhein-main.de writes:
- >In article <1992Dec20.164501.291@rlgsc.com> gezelter@rlgsc.com writes:
- >[discussion about file formats on VMS vs. UNIX flat file deleted]
- >> Incorrect. The reason that you cannot read it with C is that C
- >> has consistently ignored the standardization of IO interfaces.
- >
- >#include <stdio.h>
- >
- >(The first line in the first example code in the K&R C book)
- >
- >Honestly it's the definition of IO that's missing here. C/UNIX
- >have standardized on NOT sequential but flat direct-access files
- >for the filesystem and sequential access for pipes, some devices,
- >input format for most system commands, etc.
-
- That's an interesting point. I am not an expert in Unix file access
- but I'd guess that Unix has standardized on both sequential
- and flat direct-access files, and that sequential access is just a
- special case of direct access: read so many bytes sequentially from
- a randomly-accessible point in a file. Or, it has standardized on
- sequential file access, and that direct access is a special case, using
- the fseek() library call.
-
- >I would hazard to say that using non-flat files just isn't as open
- >as flat files, simply because the lowest common denominator is
- >exceeded.
-
- If you mean 'flat' as not being sequentially accessed, then some
- sequentially-accessed files can be not open either in the sense
- that the file formats are difficult to figure out.
-