[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: socket-port

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 106 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 106 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Sven Hartrumpf scripsit:

> I fear that an input/output port is not supported in several major Scheme
> implementations. It would be much better to have 'socket-ports' that
> returns two values: the input port and the output port.

I don't agree, because much of the time you want to both read and write
from a socket, certainly in the dominant client-server paradigm.  So you
end up wanting to package up the two ports in a single record, and why
not make that record behave like a port while you are at it?

Note that we ensured in R7RS-small that close-port closes both the input
and the output side of a bidirectional port, even though the small language
provides no ways to create such ports.  The presence of close-input-port
and close-output-port permits fine control when that is desirable.

John Cowan                              <cowan@xxxxxxxx>
                .e'osai ko sarji la lojban.
                Please support Lojban!          http://www.lojban.org