Re: SEUL: Re: extension binding/enlightenment

[William T Wilson <fluffy@dunadan.com>]

On Sun, 18 Jan 1998, Paul Anderson wrote:

> > However, does Enlightenment have the same functionality of FVWM, you can
> > kill it and start it again without disorienting any of your programs?  Or
> > does it have too much "state" for this.
> > 
> It doesn't have a problem with it...  I was killing stuff left and right..

I don't know that we are thinking the same thing.  I mean, can you kill
enlightenment itself, without creating a problem.  I was thinking it might
be a potential way around the memory leaks.

> > Do all programs even put magic numbers in their files?  For those that
> > 
> Each type of binary file has a different magic number, yes.  Text and

Not necessarily.  Joe developer writes an application for himself,
suppose.  Why should he use a magic number?  Good programming practice,
yes, but maybe he's the sort that likes lots of untyped pointers and
goto's and doesn't want to do it.  There's nothing magical about magic
numbers (erm...)  What I'm saying is that, technically, there's no reason
for a given file to necessarily have a magic number.  The fact that most
do is very nice, but does anyone know of any apps whose files might not be
so well behaved?