[R6RS] Renaming write-...
Anton van Straaten
anton at appsolutions.com
Tue Aug 1 04:47:00 EDT 2006
I think Kent wanted peek-char in the proposed I/O convenience library,
but it's also in the Port I/O library. Any suggestions about
disambiguating its name?
Alternatively, peek-char could be exported from both libraries, except
that the port argument would be optional in the convenience version.
I'm not sure that's a problem - the semantics of the two procedures are
otherwise the same.
(BTW, it occurred to me that if it weren't for write-char, whose
signature is (write-char char port), we could simply export all three
conflicting procedures from both libraries, thus avoiding having to
rename all the read-... and write-... procedures in the Port I/O
library. Not sure what would be done about write-char, though.)
Michael Sperber wrote:
> If we're renaming write-..., we should also consider renaming
> read-... to get a matching pair (or at least avoid having a
> non-matching one). Choices:
> 1. display / read
> 2. put / get
> 3. output / input
> 4. out / in
> 5. push / pull
> (I'm in favor of #2.)
> Please also consider the names of `read' and `write', relating to
> this. (And the sound of pronouncing "xxx/xxx invariance.")
> 1. read / write (awkward with #1)
> 2. read-datum / write-datum (ditto)
> 3. <write-prefix>-datum / <read-prefix>-datum (for choices #2-#5)
> 4. <write-prefix> / <read-prefix>
> (I'm in favor of #3.)
> I'm also thinking these two should be in a separate library.
More information about the R6RS