From ... Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!ossa.telenet-ops.be!nmaster.kpnqwest.net!nreader1.kpnqwest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: CLOSE and OUTPUT-STREAM-P References: Mail-Copies-To: never From: Erik Naggum Message-ID: <3226646167787252@naggum.net> Organization: Naggum Software, Oslo, Norway Lines: 17 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 10:35:52 GMT X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@KPNQwest.no X-Trace: nreader1.kpnqwest.net 1017657352 193.71.199.50 (Mon, 01 Apr 2002 12:35:52 MET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 12:35:52 MET DST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.lisp:30677 * Sam Steingold | what should OUTPUT-STREAM-P/INPUT-STREAM-P return for closed streams? Same as for the open stream, of course. The stream was created for output or input or both. If you want to know if it is also open, open-stream-p provides that answer. It is possible determine that a stream is closed but was used for output in the current design. If you make these predicates test for open-stream-p first, you remove the ability of a program to test for what a stream was before it was closed. If you conflate these two predicates, you actually destroy information. Please do not destroy information just because you would like to avoid writing more code. /// -- In a fight against something, the fight has value, victory has none. In a fight for something, the fight is a loss, victory merely relief.