Sure, but when you send #readStream to a String, then you'll always get a ReadStream on that String.
Perhaps there is a similarly-named method like #asReadFileStream that he meant to write instead (and that is just a guess, since I have no way of checking at the moment) -- Cheers, Peter On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Hannes Hirzel <[email protected]>wrote: > Surely, but not what Randal implies in terms of streams I suppose.... > > The idiom implies that a file stream is created and that I get the > content of a file -- not the content of the file name. > > --Hannes > > On 10/30/10, Peter Hugosson-Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > The result you got is what I would have expected too. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Peter > > > > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Hannes Hirzel > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> Hello > >> > >> Randal Schwartz writes in his blog > >> > >> > http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/writestreams-of-consciousness-going-to-xtream > >> about streams citing Derek Williams http://derekwilliams.us/?p=1411 > >> > >> He gives the following as an example of elegant syntax of Smalltalk > >> > >> 'myfile.txt' asFileName readStream contents > >> > >> This does not work in Squeak nor in Pharo. > >> > >> It produces a ReadStream on the contents of the _String_ 'myfile.txt'. > >> i.e. the ByteString with 10 elements. > >> > >> Comments? > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Hannes > >> > > >
