|
|
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 01:59:06 -0500, Peter Krefting wrote:
>> But the inability to continue to have my cache archived and indexed by
>> Copernic or Google is a real problem.
> Well, in my opinion, if the indexing software relies on the file extension
> to identify the file format, then it is the indexing software that needs
> to be changed.
And apparently so does Windows need to be re-written :)
Is there any difference in efficiency between immediately identifying
file types by name alone, vs. having to scan the file content instead?
How does indexing software discern plain text from a "command/batch" file,
or from a dozen other programming languages, whose extensions
would immediately identify them?
Can anyone distinguish a ".bat" file from a ".cmd" file, by content?
[In general, no.]
How about encrypted files having no "header bytes"
or formally structured "packets" -- can you tell
which kind of encrypted file it is?
(if so, the cipher being used is a failure).
Etc.
--
|
|