This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj@nada.kth.se> writes: > I think, maybe, that the win in this case (being able to treat files > opened for update in a simpler way than in the POSIX interface) is not > worth the cost involved in its implementation. I suspect that this > holds even if we try to find a more efficient implementation. My understanding is that this allows safe read and write to the same port without the user having to flush in between to accommodate for losing STDIO implementations. If we remove this then we are requiring users to flush if they want their code to be robust on all platforms. Since I do not recall a "flush" procedure to be called on ports in R[45]RS, tho perhaps I just missed it, this would mean not implementing R[45]RS portably in Guile, and not maintaining basic scheme semantics. Our users should not have to worry about that. > I plead for dropping this change entirely. I do too, but only by replacing it with a fix that maintains the present user interface, and performs better, ie, the re-implementation of STDIO buffering that Jim mentioned in his previous post. In the meantime perhaps a check to see if your on a lame platform or not in the compilation of guile would reduce it's impact on everyone by sparing those with a real STDIO the agony. -- Craig Brozefsky craig@onshore.com onShore Inc. http://www.onshore.com/~craig Programmer loitering on the edge