|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: max 200 entries in a dir. why?Re: max 200 entries in a dir. why?
From: Justin Heiner <jheiner_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 00:29:06 -0700 (PDT) I'll throw my $.02 USD in on this idea (only friendly criticism of course :) --- Bjoern Fischer <bfischer_at_Techfak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> wrote: > Another approach would be to require structured directory names, e.g. > 0001_Freakpower > 0002_Gus_Gus > 0003_ZZ-Top > ...you get the idea. A (Perl/Bourne-Shell)-Script or the sync software > takes care that the numbering properly reflects the lexicographic > ordering. The firmware doesn't need to perform sorting operations at all. Doesn't seem flexible enough on the user end. I think a "Plug-N-Play" approach is better, instead of some synch software. > But this is all nothing compared to... > ...yet another approach: Soon HDD write operations will be implemented > (for both, recorder AND player, did I get this right?). Then it is possible > to maintain an (hidden) index file for each directory, that is automatically > updated by the firmware. This also takes the burden of sorting off every > directory access. These index files can also be maintained by external > software, but I would prefer the 'self-contained' solution. The only problem with that idea is that it adds a file to every single folder that is accessed. Personally, this reminds me of an old MSDOS virus checker that added a check file to every folder on my hard drive. I remember it kind of pissing me off :) If this kind of idea is going to be implemented I think it should use a folder in the root called something like /.rockbox/, so that it wouldn't interfere. But again, as a wise man once stated, don't argue about it, code it! :-) -Justin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com Received on 2002-08-13 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |