It appears that im wrong. sorry for disturbing :) 2010/1/15 Igor Stasenko <siguc...@gmail.com>: > Hello guys, > > today, by examining closely the #atEnd implementation , i came to > conclision that is can be made as simple as: > > atEnd > ^ self isDataAvailable not > > > Because, take a close look at old implementation: > atEnd > self isInBufferEmpty ifFalse: [^false]. ----***--- > ^self isConnected not > and: [self isDataAvailable not] > > and: > isDataAvailable > > self isInBufferEmpty ifFalse: [^true]. ---***--- > ^socket dataAvailable > ifFalse: [false] > ifTrue: [self receiveDataIfAvailable; isDataAvailable] > > > a Socket>>dataAvailable answers false on closed or invalid socket. You > can check it quite simply: > > (SocketStream openConnectionToHostNamed: 'google.com' port: 80) > socket closeAndDestroy dataAvailable > (SocketStream openConnectionToHostNamed: 'google.com' port: 80) close > socket dataAvailable > Socket new dataAvailable > => all 3 answer false > > Therefore, a complex logic in #atEnd, could be simplified. > > Please, try to find a flaw in my conclusions. I think there's not. But > 2 (or more) heads always better than 1. > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
