[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
A few random I/O proposals
I think the former is probably a better idea, at least if there is
only going to be one way in the standard for sending output to
strings. I can imagine a situation occuring where somebody might want
to send output to two separate places at once, and
with-output-to-string doesn't cover that. At any rate, they're both
better than the possibilities I mentioned.
I think I like the former better.
Minor points: I would call make-string-output-port open-output-string
instead, and string-output-port-content output-string-contents.
Output-string-contents should work on a port that has been closed. I
wouldn't want to include the with-output-to-truncated-string, and
would call string->input-port open-input-string instead. Also is
with-input-from-port a typo? Whether or not it is, having a generic
with-input-from-port (and with-output-to-port) might not be a bad idea
- much better than having to add an extra pair of procedures for each
new kind of port that a given implementation supports.
It was a typo, I meant with-input-from-string. Of course, MIT Scheme
also has with-input-from-port and with-output-to-port.
These were proposed at one point, but shot down. I don't quite