Re: [racket-dev] Can't use (current-output-port) with subprocess in DrRacket: does it matter?

2011-01-07 Thread Eli Barzilay
An hour and a half ago, John Clements wrote: > Currently, you can't run the mongodb tests in DrRacket, because they > use "subprocess" with (current-output-port), which (in DrRacket) is > not a file-stream port. So they should switch to `process' which does the necessary gluing. (One thing I don'

Re: [racket-dev] Can't use (current-output-port) with subprocess in DrRacket: does it matter?

2011-01-07 Thread John Clements
On Jan 7, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Robby Findler wrote: > I don't think it is possible with our current port support to make a > port that goes into a text% and returns #t to that predicate (is it?). In that case, I'll edit the docs to reflect this. John smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic

Re: [racket-dev] Can't use (current-output-port) with subprocess in DrRacket: does it matter?

2011-01-07 Thread Robby Findler
I don't think it is possible with our current port support to make a port that goes into a text% and returns #t to that predicate (is it?). Robby On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 2:36 PM, John Clements wrote: > Currently, you can't run the mongodb tests in DrRacket, because they use > "subprocess" with (

[racket-dev] Can't use (current-output-port) with subprocess in DrRacket: does it matter?

2011-01-07 Thread John Clements
Currently, you can't run the mongodb tests in DrRacket, because they use "subprocess" with (current-output-port), which (in DrRacket) is not a file-stream port. In DrRacket's interactions window: > (file-stream-port? (current-output-port)) #f Is this expected, or should DrRacket's current-outp