 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22-4-2010 21:54, Darren New wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> Ah ok. And how do I do that? I'll find out next week after some
>> deadlines.
>
> http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-10878_11-6163793.html
>
> GIYF, once you have a basic idea of what the answer looks like. :-)
>
> In particular, peek at Figure G.
>
> If that doesn't help (and you might have to tell it to reindex stuff),
> then there's something out there somewhere that provides a "this is
> really a text file" interface for an arbitrary list of extensions.
>
> http://www.bench3.com/2009/06/customize-search-feature-in-windows.html
> explains that a bit more, showing you where you'll see it. See if that
> helps. And again, remember that unless you wait for the rebuild of the
> index, it won't necessarily show up right away.
>
Although this is for vista, I get the idea.
Basically what happens is that while I still think a file is a sequence
of bytes my OS suddenly has started thinking about the contents and
meaning of my files. I wasn't expecting that, so I was dumbfounded that
the utilities that used to work suddenly didn't behave as before. They
probably have advertised this increase in user friendliness extensively
and I have not paid attention. Conclusion: it is all my fault.
BTW is there a switch to tell the system that it can keep the PnP, the
USB support and the filesystems but otherwise stop trying to 'help' me
and behave like a simple windows 95 machine?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22-4-2010 22:23, Gilles Tran wrote:
>
> discussion : 4BD### [at] gmail com...
>> Matlab files with extension .m in XP
>> no luck but your google skills are way beyond mine anyway.
>>
>> Do you have an idea why it would not find those or look into them
>> anyway? Because if I had a theory about that I could try to find a cure.
>
> Darren gave you the answer, but here's the magic google search:
> http://www.google.com/search?q=xp+search+matlab+files
when you do it it always sounds so simple :(
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> I have a vague recollection of seeing some Tcl extension that did
> something I wanted, and being unable to actually make it work.
Yet, oddly enough, I've been using Tcl to invoke and serve COM in production
systems for ... oh, six or seven years?
> Ah, so they added it to Java?
Oddly enough, that too would be answered by putting
java "COM interface"
into google and clicking "I feel lucky."
> For Smalltalk, I'm going to put my foot down and assert that the
> implementation that *I* have doesn't support COM.
Which implementation do you use?
Plus, you probably use Word and Excel, and they both support COM too.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> I sense an apples to oranges comparison going on here. Why are you
> comparing Konqueror with Windows Explorer, anyway?
Because one is the default file manager in OpenSUSE and the other is the
default file manager in Windows.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 21:26:18 +0200, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Nekar Xenos wrote:
>> I love tabbed browsing. Then I have more space on the taskbar for all
>> my other windows.
>
> I put the task bar on the side. I can probably put 40 tabs on there
> before it gets close to full.
>
I actually did that at one stage. But it was on a normal CRT monitor back
then and everybody else complained that they couldn't find anything... ;)
--
-Nekar Xenos-
"The spoon is not real"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I have a vague recollection of seeing some Tcl extension that did
>> something I wanted, and being unable to actually make it work.
>
> Yet, oddly enough, I've been using Tcl to invoke and serve COM in
> production systems for ... oh, six or seven years?
Yeah, well, I had noticed that you seem to know far more about COM than
I do. (To me, "COM" is "that thing which apparently powers Windows but
that I can't actually get near".)
>> For Smalltalk, I'm going to put my foot down and assert that the
>> implementation that *I* have doesn't support COM.
>
> Which implementation do you use?
Smalltalk VisualWorks. I *think* it was v3.0...
> Plus, you probably use Word and Excel, and they both support COM too.
You mean VBA supports COM?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>> I sense an apples to oranges comparison going on here. Why are you
>> comparing Konqueror with Windows Explorer, anyway?
>
> Because one is the default file manager in OpenSUSE and the other is the
> default file manager in Windows.
One is *a* default file manager in OpenSUSE. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:28:57 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 22/04/2010 9:02 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> Apparently not. Dunno the current state, as I don't use Windows...
>>
>> Jim
>
> Your lighting bill must be huge ;-)
:P
Not so much, though, I prefer the darkness generally. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Yeah, well, I had noticed that you seem to know far more about COM than
> I do.
Not *that* much. Maybe a half a day's worth of learning?
>> Which implementation do you use?
> Smalltalk VisualWorks. I *think* it was v3.0...
http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/documentation/current/ReleaseNotes7.5.pdf
They were up to a version that supports it (7.5) five years ago. You were
working with V3.0. Perhaps you were using a pre-COM version that wouldn't
run under Win98 or something?
>> Plus, you probably use Word and Excel, and they both support COM too.
> You mean VBA supports COM?
How do you think VBA talks to the application? Of course it supports COM.
That's pretty much *all* it supports. It doesn't really do anything on its own.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nekar Xenos wrote:
> I actually did that at one stage. But it was on a normal CRT monitor
> back then and everybody else complained that they couldn't find
> anything... ;)
Why were they logged into your account? :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
