[Info-vax] Extending nested directory search syntax

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 7/8/2021 2:25 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-07-08, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 7/8/2021 1:51 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> If you want to search all directories under sys$examples: (for example),
>>> it would be nice if the following syntax worked instead of giving
>>> an error:
>>>
>>> $ dir sys$examples:[...]
>>> %DIRECT-E-OPENIN, error opening SYS$EXAMPLES:[...] as input
>>> -RMS-F-DIR, error in directory name
>>>
>>> Would anyone else find such syntax to be useful ?
>>
>> Would you also expect:
>>
>> $ dir SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSHLP.EXAMPLES][...]
>>
>> to work?
>>
> 
> Yes. I don't see any way in which that would break existing behaviour.
> 
> You would still get one directory specification if you use f$parse()
> or any of the other lower level parsing routines; it's just that the
> VMS filename parser would combine it into one directory specification
> before returning it to the user.
> 
> As far as I can see, my suggestion is backwards compatible with the
> existing syntax and just introduces additional functionality that
> does not break existing functionality.
> 
> It's annoying not being able to search subdirectories in this way
> using logical names when the VMS designers have gone to the effort
> to add such detailed logical name functionality and it seems more like
> an artificial limitation in the filename specification parser.

It should not break existing functionality, but it is a big change
to what has to be supported.

[foobar]
[...]
[foobar][...]
[foobar][a][b]
[foobar][a][b][...]
[foobar][...][a][b]

And they need to get it right everywhere.

A directory syntax that work in some contexts but not in other
contexts is not good.

Arne