What happened to RCR 65?

ruby-talk
1

Hi gurus and nubys,

I was recently noticed of the existence of RCR65 that suggested
that the I/O functionality could be made in smaller piece instead of
the only IO monolith .

But it seems that the RCR somewhat disappeared, it's not been ported
to RCRchive.net, and rubygarden.org gives a blank page for it.

Yet, it can be retrieved via the Wayback Machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20030608035701/http://www.rubygarden.org/article.php?sid=179
and it seem matz would have agreed with it, given a proper design.

It would be nice if the author could repost it,imo.

2

Hi --

···

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, gabriele renzi wrote:

Hi gurus and nubys,

I was recently noticed of the existence of RCR65 that suggested
that the I/O functionality could be made in smaller piece instead of
the only IO monolith .

But it seems that the RCR somewhat disappeared, it's not been ported
to RCRchive.net, and rubygarden.org gives a blank page for it.

It is actually on RCRchive, among the legacy rejected RCRs
(RCRS). (I haven't
read through all the discussion, so I'm not sure of the reason for
rejection or whether a modified version might be accepted.)

David

--
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net

3

This is the final sentence in the RCR65

···

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:42:42 +0900, "David A. Black" <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:

--------------------------
Reason for rejection
IO is an IO is an IO. We need to extract Stream behavior first.
----------------------------

makes sense, but it doesn't look that anything on the Stream thing is
done in the meantime.

4

Oops. Sorry for the noise :slight_smile:

···

il Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:42:42 +0900, "David A. Black" <dblack@wobblini.net> ha scritto::

It is actually on RCRchive, among the legacy rejected RCRs
(RCRS).