On Tue 05 Mar 2013 20:17, "David A. Wheeler" <dwhee...@dwheeler.com> writes:
> I reported: >> > Guile's peek-char has a bug; it incorrectly *consumes* eof instead of >> > just reporting it. > > Andy Wingo replied: >> I have the feeling that for interactive use, if you expect to read a EOF >> from a port and then continue, you have to not use peek-char. You need >> to handle your own lookahead buffer. I know it's not a great answer, >> but I can't think of anything else that makes sense. > > We don't want to read an EOF and then continue. > We peek-char to not *CONSUME* an interactive EOF. I understand what it is you want. But I don't know of any sane way to implement it. Given that it is an edge case -- peek-char on an interactive port -- I think the thing to do is to document this inconsistency, and for you (in your code) to implement some sort of abstraction that does not use peek-char. That is to say, use read-char, and do unread-char as necessary. Or keep your own buffer around. I know it isn't nice, but I don't know how to do anything better. Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
