In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andre Berger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> * Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2005-09-19 06:40 +0200:
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> [...]
> > And under OS X, it's called open, but it's not as powerful as what
> > I've written.
> Give it a different name to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Got any suggestions? "Launch" is less accurate and also already taken
by an OSS replacement for open on OSX. I don't like "start" - it's
less accurate as well. "display" might work, but it's also already
taken, by something comletely different. Likewise, the two alternative
names that open already supports - "edit" and "convert" exist as
commands. "edit" is a hard link to ee, and "convert" is an image
conversion program that comes with ImageMagick.
The names are important. The default action is the basename of the
name the program was invoked as. So where "open foo.gif" might use
xloadimage, "edit foo.gif" might invoke the gimp. Of course, you can
install it as whatever you want and alias them to
"mwms-magic-file-opener -c open" and "mwms-magic-file-opener -c
edit". But the longer it waits, the harder it is to change them.
I'm waiting for the python crowd to object to using "open" as
well. It's builtin in the language, and they frown on using those as
variable names.
Thanks,
<mike
--
Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
