4+n letter file extensions (small rant)

Miscellaneous Topics
#1

(rant)
My big annoyance with all that is computers is not using 4+n character file extensions. I’m tired of EVERYTHING (almost) using a stupid 3 letter file extension. Is it so hard to call a file with an extension like 3dmodel, pngimage, or preferences?

Sure, everyone might want to use an extension like 3dmodel, but thats why you’d pesonalize the extension. I’d make mine dra_3dmodel. It tells you what the file is and the format. You wouldn’t confuse it with another 3d file format whose extension was 3dmodel_ea_games.
(/rant)

Is anyone with me here? Aren’t you tired of tiny weenie file extensions?

Dr. A>

#2

No, not really, the last thing I want to be doing is typing more :slight_smile:

Kev

#3

.java
.class
.jnlp
.html

:wink:

#4

quote
My big annoyance with all that is computers is not using 4+n character file extensions. I’m tired of EVERYTHING (almost) using a stupid 3 letter file extension.
[/quote]
The only reason for file extensions is to be backwards compatible with backwards OS’s :stuck_out_tongue: hence people use 3 to be maximally backwards compatible.

Seriously, though, there are FS’s that only support precisely 8.3, so for maximum compat you have to stick to 3 max.

For modern software dev, you use MIME types anyway…if you can.

#5

Must be especially annoying to code in C then eh?

Cas :slight_smile:

#6

The most restrictive file system still in common use is probably ISO 9660. At level one file names are restricted to 8.3 form. Most system now support at least level 2 which allows names upto 31 characters long (including the ‘dot’ and extension). While this does allow extensions longer than 3 characters, you wouldn’t want too long an extension as it then reduces the length of the name you can use.

#7

I guess my issue is, I don’t care about being backwards compatible with most systems. The three that I use (win, lin, mac) can all handle longer extensions.

I just get a tad ‘bonko’ when I start a new project and the custom files, such as configs and such, all have 3 letter extensions. Its really only a trivial amout of typing extra.

A related rant would be not using spaces in file names. I’m open to all flames about this, but I refuse to keep pretending I’m using an OS from 10 years ago which choked on a space in a file name. I’d much prefer -

Vacation Feb 03 001.photo
Vacation Feb 03 002.photo

to

vacf03001.img

If you drop in underscores where the spaces are in the first names, at least its visually readable still.

I guess this is more a commentary on how things are done now, based on how things used to be done, whether they need to or not.

Dr. A>

PS - Of course I’m such a lazy typist, I shorten Doctor Anonymous, maybe I shouldn’t say much. :slight_smile:

PPS - Markus_Persson: Good call! Thats probably why I love java so much!

PPPS - The amiga called its libraries; get this - something.library!

#8

I don’t like spaces in file names; I dunno why. I always use underscores or dots. For picture files I’d usually do something like: Name_MM.DD.YYYY.extension

Works ok for me. :slight_smile: Besides, in modern OSs, there isn’t a limit to your extension, is there?

.htaccess comes to mind, but I’m not sure if that’s really an extension with no name or a name with no extension.

.tiff is 4 letters as well.

#9

I would like extensions to be able to be longer, but I don’t like the whole “dra_3dmodel” and “3dmodel_ea_games” idea. Imagine writing the program that’s supposed to be able to read all that. I’d much rather prefer one “3dm” format for all 3D models that was compatible with all other types so you wouldn’t need 8 different programs to handle a project’s worth of 3D development. Exploding the number of extensions would make compatibility and conversion a nightmare.

#10

I don’t think he was saying people should create more formats, just that you should clearly state your format in the extension, its easy to tell what a file is.

#11

There are no systems still in use (by anyone that counts) that can’t handle >3 char “extensions”. Heck, even the Commodore 64 used 16 character file names.
People still writing stuff to DOS limitations should be shot along with the same group that forced the DOS limitations on us for well over a decade after they were obsolete (that would be Microsoft :slight_smile: )

Though Windows XP is STILL incredibly broken in many ways concerning the file system (NTFS). E.g. you can not make a file that ends with a period. You can’t make a file that is named COM1.txt It thinks you are talking to a serial port despite the .txt extension. Even a full path name “C:\temp\com2.this_is_not_a_com_port” won’t work.

On modern OS’s (of which I do not include WinXP, given it is still chained to these ridiculous DOS limitations) there isn’t even a concrete concept of an “extension” the name is the name and if you end it with dot-whatever so be it. The ending of the file name may still be used to guess how to interpret the data within though.

#12

Even at level 3 ISO 9660 only allows a single period in a file name. If you want more you have to use an extension which almost certainly give you trouble reading under a different OS.

#13

And the reverse - you can’t actually make a file that has just an extension, like .project That always annoys me when I have to go tinkering with Eclipse project files. >:(

#14

[quote][…]
.htaccess comes to mind, but I’m not sure if that’s really an extension with no name or a name with no extension.
[…]
[/quote]
That’s actually a “hidden” file without any extension.

#15

Ye, that’s quite annoying. Well, I can rename files to “.something” from textpad or via command line. You could also write a little explorer extension with vbs or something like that.

#16

The whole “extensions” thing is backwards anyway. Metadata has its place, and it is not in filename.

Mlk (ex-BeOS user)

#17

I kinda like them. It lets the user see what type a file is directly from a dir or a ls.

It would also suck to download something called “license.txt” that has it’s icon set to the “text document icon”, but really is a nasty trojan executable.

#18

Um, yes you can. I have several on my system right now. In fact you must know that since Eclipse DOES save files with that name. Are we talking about the same thing? maybe you are talking about a limitation of windows explorer or the command line shell. I’m talking about the filesystem namespace, which is totally hosed.

#19

[quote]I kinda like them. It lets the user see what type a file is directly from a dir or a ls.

It would also suck to download something called “license.txt” that has it’s icon set to the “text document icon”, but really is a nasty trojan executable.
[/quote]
This is my point. There is no standard for showing file types to end users. The extension is the best thing that has widespread use so far. That’s also why it is criminal for Microsoft to disable showing the extension for so-called “known file types”

Icons could work, but they don’t work reliably to show file type, at least on windows where apps routinely hi-jack extensions. Not to mention the fact that most trojans do infact include an icon resource to make the file look like a harmless image or text document as you wrote above.

#20

[quote]That’s also why it is criminal for Microsoft to disable showing the extension for so-called “known file types”
[/quote]
Yes, but you can set the file preferences to show the extension always, that’s what I do.