Re: rel-files

From: Jim Brain <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:15:37 -0500
Message-ID: <>
On 6/9/2013 9:25 AM, A. Fachat wrote:
> Hi there,
> - When you position to a record number that is not yet there you get a "50,
> RECORD NOT PRESENT" as documented - but when you write to that, the file gets
> expanded "to that block". So if you address a record that _behind_ the one you
> wrote to, but is in the same disk block as it, it has already been created and
> you get an OK. So expansion happens disk-block-wise (which is logical, just
> wanted to state it here..)
Are you sure it has to be in the same disk block?  From working on 
sd2iec REL file support, once the file is expanded, a write to any 
previous block will be 'OK'
> - when a record is initiated, it is initiated with one "$ff" and the rest zero
> bytes.
I can confirm this.
> - PRINTing a partial record fills the rest of the record with zero-bytes. If
> the PRINT did not start at the beginning of the record (e.g. due to
> positioning), the part before the PRINTed data is kept.
> Is this all correct? Do you know any more quirks with relative files?
An open of an existing REL file using the long form (i.e., with the 
record length in the open command) will generate an error for any length 
that does not match the correct length of the REL file record length.  
This can be used to derive the record length of a REL file that you do 
not know.  Simple the file with increasining reclens until one gives 'ok'


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Received on 2013-06-10 07:00:03

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.