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

Re: Positioning

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 56 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 56 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 03:39:38 -0500, Alex Shinn wrote
> At Wed, 15 Sep 2004 10:00:15 +0200, Hans Oesterholt-Dijkema wrote:
> Hi, and welcome to the discussion.

Thank you.

> It would indeed be a logical next step from a given view of ports,
> however it's distinctly a _next_ step and I would rather a separate
> SRFI deal with this, especially as it's already 1 day past the draft
> period for SRFI-56.  I had considered this, and binary-typed ports,
> and mmaped ports, and univorm vector block reads, but all of these
> open a number of issues I'd rather not deal with.  Specifically with
> positioning/seeking primitives, apart from interface (POSIX vs. 
> other) you have to deal with non-seekable ports, and are likely to 
> get into simultaneous input/output ports.  Scheme still has a long 
> way to go on its port API - for now it would be nice if, whatever 
> those ports are, we can read or write a single byte to them.

I understand and respect this view. However, I myself am working
on a SFRI Proposal for Shared Memory access for which I want to use
the Scheme Port mechanism. I'm also running into the simultaneous
input/output ports problem and the positioning/seeking primitives.

Currently I'm borrowing some of these constructs from bigloo. For
Shared Memory access, a positioning primitive, I think, is really 

> --
> Alex

Hans Oesterholt-Dijkema