And of course, I forgot all the usages of ReadWriteStream.
I started rewriting some usage in Squeak, and good news, 95% of usage is
unecessary, a WriteStream is sufficient.


2013/11/12 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.n...@gmail.com>

> It's just a matter of selecting a strategy. I've proposed two:
> A) create a wrapper class for legacy Stream compatibility selectors
> B) create extensions for Legacy Stream compatibility selectors
> My preference goes to A)
>
> The legacy support MUST be minimal (next nextPut: nextPutAll: peek upTo:
> ...), otherwise we will import all the cruft in Xtream and would go back to
> our starting point...
> Once the minimal support written (a few hours should be enough), we should
> gradually switch each every legacy Stream usage -> Xtream.
>
> An area which require more work is those Streams that have mixed
> conventions (one portion is interpreted as text, another as binary).
> In theory that's easy, we just have two streams and they both wrap on a
> low level binary stream, but that means we have to be very cautious with
> buffers and caches.
>
> Another area of work is usage of ugly selectors like name (we try to
> access the file name from the Stream API, arghh). Those usages are bad and
> require a rewrite.
>
>
> 2013/11/12 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr>
>
>>
>>
>> or of course, you start looking at porting XStreams to pharo ;), which on
>> the long run will
>> solve many more problems. The current situation is not that satisfactory
>>
>>
>> having experience with it and thinking about a plan for the beginning of
>> 40 would be great.
>> I know that nicolas ported XTream to pharo/squeak. Now understanding how
>> integrate it would be nice.
>> Stef
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to