Ned Konz <ned at bike-nomad.com> wrote:
> One of my sets of fixes, in fact, introduced a distinction between opening 
> text streams and opening raw streams: by adding new stream creation methods 
> that paralleled the existing ones, we could be specific about what we wanted.

I had forgotten who proposed this, but I did like it better than the
current situation where you change modes *after* you open it.  The
current way means that every file class has to support both text and
binary modes, even though there are no *real* needs for this.

TextFile has the same idea of choosing modes at open time, though it
uses a different sequence of messages.


> > Also, I can tell you that it's not 
> > too bad to just switch over like this. ÊIt's easy to fix the individual
> > broken cases; it is just frustrating that the upstream developers
> > frequently don't really care.
> 
> Do you know of any CrLfFileStream related fixes that we need to apply?

None that I know of, but I must admit that I gave up the CrLfFileStream
battle a few months ago and have been using StandardFileStream.  I like
CLFS better but it takes too much time to fix the bugs when so few
others are using it.


Lex