> > ...I never understood why support for write-only streams was ever
 > > needed. What's wrong with just assuming all streams are readable?
 > > Then this classic dilemma just goes away. It seems to me that
 > > whoever wrote the first internal streams implementation for
 > > Smalltalk simply got that part wrong, and no one questioned it for a
 > > long time. I wouldn't make this a primary motivating example for
 > > traits (hopefully there's a better one).
 >
 > There are lot of hardware having a write-only capabilities...

      I was speaking of internal streams, but even in the external 
stream case, you can just leave it to the external resource to complain 
if an inappropriate reading operation is attempted (not to the stream 
itself).


-C

--
Craig Latta
improvisational musical informaticist
www.netjam.org
Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]