LabRat

Philip Knodle pknodle at bu.edu
Sat Nov 17 20:42:45 UTC 2001


danielv at netvision.net.il wrote:

>You are rightly hesitant in this case - the implementation is a usage
>guidance - you are not supposed to create Streams without specifying an
>object to be streamed over. This is the role for the parameter of
>on:/with:.
>
>Maybe you could explain why you want to separate the creation of the
>stream from it's configuration - there might be an easier way to achieve
>whatever it is you're trying to do.
>
The general idea is that I have a volt meter in the lab across the 
street that I want to acess on my computer using squeak.  Say that every 
second my volt meter takes a reading.  So there is this collection of 
volt meter readings that I need to get realtime and thatI don't know 
where they end.

My first inclination was to override the stream class.  I would read the 
data off of a socket, and throw it at my custom stream class, and that 
would be that.  I was thinking I could reuse the streams class easily 
this way.  And I coded with fury...

After some thought, subclassing Collection is a better idea.  This way, 
I can use the collection of reading as a collection, and when I want a 
stream I can use Stream on: when I want a stream.

So, I'm going to make these changes for the next alpha.  I tihnk this 
solves my problems of breaking the stream class and having a realtime 
collection.  Any thoughts and advise is welcome and appreciated.

I've used Java a bit, and I thought that Smalltalk streams are silmilar 
to Java streams.  So I coded without understanding the difference.  This 
reminds me of a fortune I try to code by:
"Furious activity is no substitute for understanding.
        -- H.H. Williams
" --by way of the fortune file

--
Happy Thinking,
Phil Knodle
 







More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list