🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <817904288snz@wash.demon.co.uk>
           john@wash.demon.co.uk "John Washington" writes:

>How about (since this will never happen in practice anyway, well,
>hardly ever <g>) just working backwards, which, with less than
>99 clashes means just a 2nd digit?

I thought of that.  Of course, the more characters you go back, the more
chance of a clash <g>.  Now, if this were a decent filesystem I would
just vary the case (in fact, that was my first idea) - but then if it
were a decent system we'd have more than 8+3 characters anyway...

>However, some names are less than 8 chars.  I wonder if extending
>such names would be worthwhile?

Certainly it would in the case of things like the test newsgroups
(although I don't know why anyone would want to subscribe to more than
one of those anyway!).

That's why I thought of replacing the underscore - no change in meaning,
in general, and it's not dropping any significant characters...

>A succint star, too.  Good stuff, this Awk thingie.

It produces convoluted command lines, though - I'm just glad 4DOS has a
255 character limit not 127!  I'm using awk quite a lot; Perl looks more
powerful, but the syntax seems more clumsy to me...

***********************************************************************
*  chris@keris.demon.co.uk      *                                     *
*  chriscr@cix.compulink.co.uk  *  FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life)  *
*  100014.3217@compuserve.com   *                                     *
***********************************************************************