What's the intent of ANSI wrt read-sequence and errors upon premature EOF of the input stream? The Hyperspec says:
If the end of file for stream is reached before
copying all elements of the subsequence, then the extra elements near the end ��of sequence are not updated.
Position is the index of the first element of sequence that was not updated, ��which might be less than end because the end of file was reached.
To me, this implies that read-sequence should never error simply because of a premature EOF. Instead, it should quietly return Position. Is this the correct interpretation?
Shannon Spires
·······@telespin.com
* Shannon Spires
| What's the intent of ANSI wrt read-sequence and errors upon premature EOF
| of the input stream?
READ-SEQUENCE has no exceptional conditions relating to end of file at
all, so it's unclear to me what the error could have been, whether the
EOF is premuture or expected.
#:Erik
In article <················@naggum.no>, Erik Naggum <····@naggum.no> wrote:
> * Shannon Spires
> | What's the intent of ANSI wrt read-sequence and errors upon premature EOF
> | of the input stream?
>
> READ-SEQUENCE has no exceptional conditions relating to end of file at
> all, so it's unclear to me what the error could have been, whether the
> EOF is premuture or expected.
Precisely. I'm interpreting the lack of said exception to mean that the
committee intended for no exception to be there, rather than that they
simply forgot to include one. MCL currently throws an error on premature
EOF, and I suspect that's wrong. ACL does not, and my reading of ANSI says
that's the right thing. If anybody disagrees with this, please let me
know. Otherwise, I'm going to change MCL's behavior so it's consistent
with ACL.
Thanks,
Shannon Spires
·······@telespin.com