On 21 January 2015 at 01:58, Nicolas Cellier
<nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 2015-01-21 2:31 GMT+01:00 Craig Latta <craig at netjam.org>:
>>
>>
>> > ReadWriteStream really is a complex beast.
>>
>>      Now *that* is certain. The traditional Stream implementation is
>> significantly bogus. I've never had a need for a write-only stream, so
>> all streams can be readable by default; any exceptional circumstances
>> can use... exceptions. Then ReadStream, WriteStream and ReadWriteStream
>> go away, instead there's a WritableStream subclass of
>> PositionableStream. Lots of discussion about multiple inheritance and
>> traits also goes away, which is pleasant. ;)
>>
>
> Interesting POV.
> Following the Xtreams principles, I went the opposite way, rewriting every
> usage of ReadWriteStream into either ReadStream or WriteStream. I did only
> published some in trunk, but have more unfinished/untested...
> I never had to intermix read and write randomly in a stream, this should be
> reserved to very specific things like sharing state as in a database.
> Streams make sense for sequential processings, less for random access.
> Indeed, most usage of ReadWriteStream in Squeak is just for chaining several
> processings (like a unix pipe).
> So if I write into a collection thru a WriteStream, then read the contents
> with a ReadStream, I'm done.
>
> No complex multi-purpose objects with complex capabilities and exceptions,
> just simple objects with simple capabilities, composition and delegation.

We have talked from time to time about moving to Xtream. It's a very
nice library.

frank

> Nicolas
>
>
>>      I suspect this is how They would have done it in the first place
>> back in the day, if they had had exceptions.
>>
>>
>> -C
>>
>> --
>> Craig Latta
>> netjam.org
>> +31 6 2757 7177 (SMS ok)
>> + 1 415 287 3547 (no SMS)
>>
>>
>
>
>
>