10/4 Do "dir *1.*" and "dir *2.*" mean anything special in NT Command
Prompt? I tried them and the output contain some filenames that
don't even contain '1' or '2'. Thanks.
\_ NT doesn't do full regexp's on the command line the way unix does.
Try 4dos/4nt/4os/4whatever from http://jpsoft.com if you want that.
\_ This is not the problem. And unix (sic) doesn't do full
regexp's (sic) on the command line (sic) either. --pld
\_ Idiot. There isn't a correct spelling for "regexp". It's
not a real word. "unix" is the correct spelling for the
word unless you're talking about AT&T UNIX(TM) which we're
not and the word "line" was correctly spelled. And no shit
unix doesn't do full regexp's on the command line but it
does do *1.* which is all the person cared about. You're a
fucking pedantic twink and you added zero content.
\_ Here's your content: (sic) doesn't mean "misspelled".
I'd have deleted the answer for being incorrect and
misleading, but some twink like you would have re-added
it. See below for a correct response. --pld
\_ Worse than being stupid is being stupid and thinking
you're right. "sic" means "spelling incorrect". You
are beyond stupid. The answer lies in the shell being
unable to do what s/he wants. http://jpsoft.com can do that.
Saying, "win95 has long file names!!!" is worthless.
How'd you sneak into Cal? Or have standards really
dropped so low that they now socially promote morons
straight into what used to be top notch universities?
\_ Worse than that is adamantly promoting
error. "sic" does *not* mean "spelling
incorrect"--it is from latin, and means
"thus". It is typically used when quoting
text to roughly mean "I'm quoting this guy
exactly, so please don't tell me I've made a
mistake--it was his mistake." In this case,
I assume it was used because "Unix" is
usually capitalized (and is a trademark of
AT&T, right?). Furthermore, you usually
\_ Unix hasn't been a trademark of AT&T for
about a decade, since they spun off USL,
which they later sold to Novell, who gave
the trademark to X/Open (now part of The
Open Group) to use with their standards.
Any OS meeting the X/Open requirements can
now call itself "Unix (TM)" (or a more
specific term like "Unix95",
"Unix98 Desktop", "Unix98 Server").
don't put apostrophe-s at the end of a word
to make it plural (though it is acceptable
usage for acronymns, etc. so is probably
okay for "regexp").
\_ No, no, no. When you're quoting another and
you're quoting *their* mincorrectly spelled
text, you use "sic" to state that you're aware
the spelling is incorrect and you're just
quoting it that way. "thus"? No. That makes
no sense. It's a journalism thing in modern
English. No matter what the original latin
intended.
\_ You are correct in stating correct usage for
[sic] but the etimology of the word is indeed
Latin. -- ilyas
\_ I'm not denying a latin origin. I'm saying
it doesn't matter. Looking in one's
Latin 10 Latin->English dictionary won't
yield the correct modern/journalism usage.
That's all.
\_ etimology[sic]. You mean etymology. --dim
\- 1. sic is indeed latin. reasonable translations are
"thus" or "so, but the most natural obviously depends on the context.
2. i will make a wager with anyone who claims it only means "a mis-
spelling inthe original". it can be used as a "disclaimer" about
spelling errors, grammatical errors, factual errors...whatever. this
is a pretty funny "classic soda" thread. sic vos non vobis, --psb
\_ remember Win95 long filenames kluge? Therein lies your answer.
\_ Sorry, I don't know about that in Win95 either. Can you please
elaborate? Thanks.
\_ Long filenames show up in dos 8.3 format as something
like "filena~1.txt" -- that is, filenames are
truncated, with a "~" char and a number to
disambiguate. Hence any file with more than 8 chars
before the extension or more than one dot will end in
"~#". So the pattern above can match *a lot* of files.
\_ Unless you grab one of the command line replacements
from http://jpsoft.com which handles this as you'd expect with
out using the odd 8.3 LFN kludge as you'd not expect. |
http://csua.com/feed/