finishing output translating stream
Shiro Kawai
(25 May 2005 00:05 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Michael Sperber
(06 Jun 2005 15:15 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Shiro Kawai
(07 Jun 2005 10:41 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
bear
(07 Jun 2005 16:12 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Michael Sperber
(08 Jun 2005 07:19 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Shiro Kawai
(08 Jun 2005 07:37 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Michael Sperber
(08 Jun 2005 07:52 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Shiro Kawai
(08 Jun 2005 09:08 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Shiro Kawai
(08 Jun 2005 09:10 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
bear
(08 Jun 2005 18:10 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
bear
(09 Jun 2005 02:16 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Michael Sperber
(09 Jun 2005 05:51 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream
Shiro Kawai
(21 Jun 2005 00:00 UTC)
|
Re: finishing output translating stream Michael Sperber (22 Jun 2005 07:56 UTC)
|
Shiro Kawai <xxxxxx@lava.net> writes: > Another practical (although slightly outdated) example: > A command-line interactive application which prompts the user > input. The cliche for the application to print the prompt would > be something like this: > > (begin (display *prompt*) (flush-output-port)) That's pretty convincing. (Again, thanks for bearing with me! I don't know anything about these arcane encodings, and I'm grateful you're explaining the details.) If we were to provide what you're asking for, would we need to distinguish between flush and close? (Close does a flush.) I'm assuming no. -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla