From ... Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!uio.no!news-feed.ifi.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!not-for-mail From: Erik Naggum Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: Correct behavior for file-write-date? Date: 23 Aug 2002 15:15:22 +0000 Organization: Naggum Software, Oslo, Norway Lines: 16 Message-ID: <3239104522874900@naggum.no> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: maud.ifi.uio.no 1030115723 25959 129.240.64.16 (23 Aug 2002 15:15:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@ifi.uio.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Aug 2002 15:15:23 GMT Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.lisp:38591 * Barry Margolin | We wanted to allow for file systems that don't keep track of modification | times. `file-write-date´ takes a pathname designator as argument. This could be a stream. If this stream is not associated with a file, like a network socket or pipe or whatever else the operating system offers and above which the Common Lisp implementation has chosen to offer a stream abstraction or perhaps even terminal I/O, I expect `nil´. If there is an actual file under that pathname designator, I expect a useful value or an error. -- Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder. Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.