home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!agate!anarres.CS.Berkeley.EDU!bh
- From: bh@anarres.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Brian Harvey)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
- Subject: Re: random rant on random files
- Date: 17 Aug 1992 14:26:46 GMT
- Organization: University of California at Berkeley
- Lines: 8
- Message-ID: <16ocv6INNl87@agate.berkeley.edu>
- References: <9208130624.1.11214@cup.portal.com> <700@data.rain.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: anarres.cs.berkeley.edu
-
- I don't find this "store" idea obvious at all. Does it live in memory
- or on the disk? If on the disk, does that mean there is a redundant
- disk-to-disk copy when I finally use store->file? If in memory, how
- do you handle gigabyte stores?
-
- I'm not necessarily objecting to the idea. I just need to see more
- discussion than was posted about why this is thought preferable to
- just adding seek, binary-read, and binary-write to the port mechanism.
-