Re: rel-files

From: Jim Brain <>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 09:05:23 -0500
Message-ID: <>
On 6/10/2013 1:52 PM, Greg King wrote:
> From: "A. Fachat"; on Sunday, June 09, 2013; at 10:25 AM -0400
>> - 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 is _behind_ the one you wrote to, but is in
>> the same disk block, it has already been created; and, you get an OK.
> From: "A. Fachat"; on Monday, June 10, 2013; at 6:41 AM -0400
>> Yes, you are correct, I forgot to mention that the file is filled UP 
>> to that block.
> You _did_ mention it!  You said, "..., the file gets expanded to that 
> block".  I suspect that Jim was confused because you wrote the word 
> "_behind_" instead of the word "_beyond_".
>       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Most definitely.  I read "behind" as "smaller than"

I wonder if supporting that functionality is absolutely required for 


Jim Brain

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Received on 2013-06-11 15:00:04

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.