I wholeheartedly agree! I can't remember the amount of times I've
installed a new program in windoze which decides it likes to use the
same three letter code as a previous app, wreaking havoc on my double
click habits that I brought with me from the Mac world.

Of course, we don't double click in MPE, yet! But imagine the change in
behaviour of MPEX or DSCOPY of FCOPY or just general security if we had
to rely on the name alone.

Cheers,
Jason.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From:     [log in to unmask] [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:     Thursday, May 20, 1999, 23:40:57
> To:       [log in to unmask]
> Cc:       [log in to unmask]
> Subject:  Re: MPE Filecodes
>  
> Thus it was written in the epistle of Glenn Cole,
> >
> > Though certainly I understand the desire to have several
related-but-
> > different-type files considered part of a "package," I vote against
> > treating the MPE filecode as part of the filename.
>  
> As do I.  Just because other filesystems attempt to use the name for
both  
> the
> purpose of naming and the purpose of identifying file type doesn't
mean  
> that it
> is a good idea or that MPE need follow suit.
>  
> Ted
> --
> Ted Ashton ([log in to unmask]), Info Serv, Southern Adventist
University
>           ==========================================================
> If a nonnegative quantity was so small that it is smaller than any
given
> one, then it certainly could not be anything but zero. To those who
ask  
> what
> the infinitely small quantity in mathematics is, we answer that it is
> actually zero. Hence there are not so many mysteries hidden in this
concept
> as they are usually believed to be. These supposed mysteries have
rendered
> the calculus of the infinitely small quite suspect to many people.
Those
> doubts that remain we shall thoroughly remove in the following pages,
where
> we shall explain this calculus.
>                                         -- Euler, Leonhard (1707 -
1783)
>  
> <<File:Re_ MPE Filecodes.TXT>>
> ----- End Of Original Message -----