"James S. Huggins (dot com)" wrote: > > And here I would have thought that the standard approach would have > been to write a new file to a dummy name and, upon successful > completion, to then rename the old file and then rename the new > file, and upon successful completion, to then delete the old file. > > But maybe I'm just paranoid. Not exactly, but maybe exaggeratedly cautious. That's not how it's done normally. But backup taking is common practice. ;) / Gunnar