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

Minor comments

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 68 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 68 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

The condition hierarchy tree doesn't show &i/o-operation-error and its 
descendant &i/o-operation-not-available-error. They are specified 
between &i/o-malformed-filename-error and &i/o-file-protection-error, so 
you might also want to change the order of them in the specification.

The layer-specific condition types are also not included in the list. 
This may be intentional.

file-options-include? is specified to return true or #f, not #t or #f as 
  the other predicates in this SRFI (the other predicates are type 

reader? exists but writer? does not exist.

reader-close and writer-close are not specified to take any arguments.

The documentation of make-i/o-buffer refers to a function names 
writer-write!, but the specification specifies a function named 
writer-write!! (with two exclamation marks).

open-file-reader+writer is not specified to return results equivalent to 
open-file-reader and open-file-writer. Is this intentional? Also, there 
is a typo in the third statement of the definition: "This writer and the 
writer may ...".

More documentation on open-u8vector-writer and writer-u8vector is called 
for. At the very least, create a little section that states explicitly 
that the created writer uses a private buffer that is unshared with 
writer-u8vector's result (if these are indeed the semantics).

This is a great I/O framework. I wish I knew more, and could comment on 
the real, technical issues. That said, I'm a little worried about the 
octets vs. bits decision -- there is a use for bitwise I/O.

- Amir