Re: [Chicken-hackers] Suggestion for the ports unit: port-pipe

[Jim Ursetto]

Moritz, 

I might call it port-reflect. 

I would make it an egg first and maybe if there is high enough demand promote 
it to core. 

On Aug 8, 2010, at 23:24, Felix <address@hidden> wrote:

> From: Moritz Heidkamp <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] Suggestion for the ports unit: port-pipe
> Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 05:52:34 +0200
> 
>> Felix <address@hidden> writes:
>>> I'd call it `port-copy'.
>> 
>> I thought of that, too, but it sounds like it would copy the port
>> objects rather than stream their contents. Maybe `port-stream'? I'm not
>> sure :-) What do you think about its usefulness? I might as well just
>> make an egg for it if you think it's too specific to be included in the
>> core distribution.
> 
> Hm. Perhaps `port-copy-contents' or `port-copy-data'?
> 
> It's trivial enough to be added to `ports', I guess. On the other hand
> there already is enough stuff in the core libs. I can't say.
> 
> 
> cheers,
> felix
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Chicken-hackers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers