I tend to protect the asFilename/open inside the block as you describe but I would guess it depends on what resources are allocated as to whether you need the close.
I was additionally wondering about the pattern ^file ifNil: [ nil ] ifNotNil: [ ...] if file is nil, then does it not answer self to ifNotNil: ? ^file ifNotNil: [...] thanks Mike On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi norbert > >>> I have a question: >>> - would not be better to even wrap the on: into the first block of >>> the ensure: message? >> >> What do you mean? Can you give an example? > > In VW I was used to write something like that from memory > > [ f := 'foo.bar' asFilename. > f open.... > > > ] ensure: [f close] > > so the file creation was protected. > >> >> >>> - do we have to close a file even if its creation failed? >> >> Is there anything in the above examples that raises this question? >> Usually it is the other way round. You can't close a file (that you >> don't have) if the creation failed. >> >> I was wondering about the name of the methods. Is a idiom >> >> smthg create >> aBlock value: smthg >> smthg destroy >> >> not supposed to be called during: ? > > Yes but apparently in FileStream there are newfileNamed:do:.... > I guess that this is a ruby idiom imported by avi > > Stef >> >> >> Norbert >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
