Re: standard output/error/input streams

[Phillip Lord]

John Wiegley <address@hidden> writes:

>>>>>> "PL" == Phillip Lord <address@hidden> writes:
>
> PL> The main motivation for this is the same as last time; it gives a
> PL> communication channel with Emacs which does not involve buffers at any
> PL> point. Although, if you search for "Emacs" and "standard output", other
> PL> people would like the same thing for other reasons.
>
> Have you thought of allowing files to be "opened" for direct writing as well?
> That is, I'd rather see file handles become a new output stream type, with
> stdout and stderr instances of these, than hard-coded streams for only stdout
> and stderr. Although, getting cleanup right makes me less certain.

Yes, that would be nice I agree, although standard out gives me my main
use case, and there is already support for clean up.

I'll take a look next maybe.

Phil