In article <3f21823b$1@news.povray.org>, tho### [at] trfde says...
> In article <3f213bda@news.povray.org> , Tim Cook <z99### [at] bellsouthnet>  
> wrote:
> 
> > Shouldn't unicode be portable?
> 
> It has nothing to do with Unicode.  It has to do with the filesystem and how
> it is accessed.  there is no portable way to access files with Unicode names
> because you cannot pass Unicode strings.  That is all.
> 
>     Thorsten
> 
I doubt this is a unicode file name. File systems don't use it. In fact 
the file name is likely using a perfectly valid OEM file name, which 
allows for anything from character 32 to 255, with the exception of a few 
like ',', '*', '?', etc. The problem is, using the usual complete lack of 
common sense, MS decided that the file system itself should 'allow' 
characters beyond 127, but that some standard methods for opening, 
closing, etc. the same files should only use the main ASCII range. 
Obviously POV-Ray falls pray to this same stupidity by either enforcing a 
nonexistent restriction or by calling the file handler in a way that 
results in it rejecting perfectly valid names. This is ironically a left 
over for the days of DOS, when only programs the bypassed the standard 
DOS access methods could save or read such a file.

In any case, if POV-Ray won't read them, then it is because it is not 
asking the file system to use the name properly, not because the name is 
invalid. And it literally "can't" be a unicode name, since he obviously 

are NULL + Letter and you can't 'ever' have a NULL value in a file name.

Something is going wrong here, but it is not the fault of the underlying 
filesystem, though it might be something in between the two.

-- 
void main () {

    call functional_code()
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

Post a reply to this message