Interesting, I wonder what the consequences were..

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Bob Arning <arning315 at comcast.net> wrote:
> For the historically-obsessed,
>
> Change Set:        069EOS-hh (really2192EOS-hh)
> Date:            18 May 2000
> Author:            Helge Horch
> Requires:        Squeak 2.8a
>
> Modifies ReadStream>>next to signal an Error (EndOfStream) on attempts to
> read
> at or beyond the end of the stream.  Thanks to Bob Arning (who is silently
> credited
> in the stamps <g>), existing applications relying on seeing nils should not
> be
> affected.
>
> Change Set:        102ReadStreamUndo-sma (really 2272ReadStreamUndo-sma)
> Date:            1 June 2000
> Author:            Stefan Matthias Aust
>
> Undo #2192. The consequences of raising an exception for EOF during
> ReadStream>>next should be worked out in 2.9a but not for 2.8.
>
>
> and, AFAIK, that was the end of that.
>
> Cheers,
> Bob
>
> On 7/22/13 12:09 PM, Chris Muller wrote:
>
> What if a system needs to allow nil objects in a Stream of objects and
> have it be treated as just another object in the stream rather than
> the EOS marker?
>
> So, maybe ReadStream>>#next _should_ be signaling EndOfStream, so the
> sender of #next can know the difference in that scenario.  Since the
> defaultAction is ^nil, presumably we could simply change #next to do
> that with no breakage...
>
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> EndOfStream has no references in the base image. It claims to be used
> by ReadStream >> #next, but that's not true.
>
> Time to die/deprecate?
>
> frank
>
>
>
>
>
>