[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] DBI
From: |
Peter Bex |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] DBI |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:54:15 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.2.3i |
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:47:08AM -0500, Graham Fawcett wrote:
> Yes, input port was what I was thinking. Thanks. The input port would
> return the body of the LOB and return #!eof when it's consumed.
>
> The "Chicken blob or string" options are redundant, so the revised
> proposal is to represent a LOB with a thunk that evaluates to an input
> port.
Why the thunk? (why not directly the port?)
Cheers,
Peter
--
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
experience much like composing poetry or music."
-- Donald Knuth
pgpvw8QHyxRFl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Re: [Chicken-users] New immediate values (was: DBI), (continued)
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, felix winkelmann, 2008/02/29
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/29
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Tobia Conforto, 2008/02/29
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Vincent Manis, 2008/02/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Peter Bex, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI,
Peter Bex <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Peter Bex, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Ozzi Lee, 2008/02/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Alaric Snell-Pym, 2008/02/28
Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Vincent Manis, 2008/02/27
Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI), Ozzi, 2008/02/27