On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, darekM wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt napisa(a):
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005, darekM wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt napisa(a):
Why not descend. Why not exceed tFileStream, its natural. I want read text
file in the same way like binary file.
Because then you must also descend THandlestream, TPipeStream,
TIOStream, TDecompressionStream, TMemorystream, TDecodestream
etc etc etc.
Streams are more than just for files.
Why must, for me my tTextStream is for readin text file, of course we may
implemented readln in tBufStream
Pipes, Compressed Streams, IO, Decode and so on can also contain text.
Your implementation requires that we re-implement your solution in all
of these classes if we want to have the 'readln()' functionality
available.
While complicated, when it only 2 procedure should be added. Form me
tTextStream should be used to fast and simple read text file (or
application input stream) and no others, no allocate nor reallocate
buffer. only simple read (and write).
It's not so simple.
It is.I've implemented it. Of course if we want to make universal bufStream
then take it more work.
And that is what is needed.
3. There is already a buffered stream (TBufStream, unit bufstream), I
suggest you enhance that.
Sorry, i don;t know about it. Its simple to implemented it.
But why it is in separated unit, nobody know about it (or to few). F.e.
Lazarus has own implementation of buffering.
If we want to make faster programs, object like my should be in core unit,
then everybody use them, in other case every make own implementation.
Maybe, but then we should put all streams in Classes, and we're not going
to
do that.
But tBufStream is Owner of stream, for me is separated idea
That is optional behaviour, and disabled by default.
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
