Re: New draft of FileWriter API posted

The selected design sounds good. Thanks for clarifying this detail for me.

      -ilkka

On 17.03.10 18:27, ext Eric Uhrhane wrote:
> Actually, you can't even do the cut-one-byte-off trick.  That's by
> design; if you don't have read access, all you can do is overwrite the
> file.  The user has selected the location for you to write to, and you
> don't have the privileges to make any other decisions about overwrite
> vs. append.
>
> Length will read as 0, so a seek(-1) will translate to a seek(0).
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Ilkka Oksanen<Ilkka.Oksanen@nokia.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Eric,
>>
>> Looks like if some script just has write access to a file it can't reliably
>> seek to the end of that file in append use case. Seek(-1) gets close but
>> chops one byte off. One work-a-round is to use seek(very large number), but
>> should there also be a more elegant way?
>>
>>      -ilkka
>>
>>
>> On 06.03.10 04:01, ext Eric Uhrhane wrote:
>>      
>>> I've just posted a new draft of the File Writer API [1], based on the
>>> version I posted in January [2].  I look forward to your feedback.  In
>>> the mean time, I'll get going on a clean draft of the FileSystem API.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>        Eric Uhrhane
>>>        ericu@google.com
>>>
>>> [1] http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/file-system/file-writer.html
>>> [2]
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jan/0228.html
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>
>>
>>

Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2010 17:14:46 UTC