From: Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
Date: 2004-05-04T21:49:12+09:00
Subject: Re: IO::write

On Tuesday, May 4, 2004, 6:42:35 PM, Yukihiro wrote:

> Hi,

> In message "IO::write"
>     on 04/05/04, Charles Comstock <cc1@cec.wustl.edu> writes:

> |Why is there only an IO::read, and no equivalent IO::write that takes a
> |filename, a string to write, and an optional offset in the file to start
> |writing at?  Or better yet an IO::write(filename[,offset])= string to
> |write to file.  I don't know it seems useful to me for quickly writing a
> |response out to a file anyone else?

> IO::read is a equivalent of 
>
>   IO::open(path, "r"){|f| f.read(*args)}
>
> But IO::write that is
>
>   IO::open(path, "w"){|f| f.write(*args)}
>
> is, for my eyes, useless for most of the cases.

You've stated in the past that you don't see much need for a "write at
once" operation like the above.  I've needed it several times in the
past and believe I'll need it several times in the future.

> Besides that, I don't feel it is intuitive that IO::write to "open,
> then write once, then close". Even if we decide to implement the
> method, we should prepare better name.

It's *very* intuitive to me, simply because IO.write is acting exactly
the opposite to IO.read.

I don't see what else a method named IO.write could do.

# Well, IO.read and IO.write should probably be methods on File, not
# IO, but that's not the point.

Cheers,
Gavin