Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!kddlab!titcca!sragwa!wsgw!socslgw!diamond
From: diamond@csl.sony.co.jp (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal
Subject: Re: Another simple question (BSI/ISO Pascal)
Message-ID: <10984@riks.csl.sony.co.jp>
Date: 23 Oct 89 02:59:17 GMT
References: <115@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> <115@tacitus.tfic.bc.ca> <13428@reed.UUCP>
Reply-To: diamond@riks. (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Sony Computer Science Laboratory Inc., Tokyo, Japan
Lines: 27

In article <115@tacitus.tfic.bc.ca> clh@tfic.bc.ca (Chris Hermansen) writes:

>>The last I recall, a generally acceptable solution to implementing
>>Pascal I/O was using `lazy I/O', as in:

That is my impression too.

In article <13428@reed.UUCP> reeder@reed.UUCP (Doug Reeder) writes:

>My experience writing a Pascal Compiler is that is lazy i/o is a pain to
>implement, as input must be treated differently than all other files,

I think you mean the predefined "input" file.  I would think that ALL
files opened-for-input could be treated equally lazily, and that special
treatment would not be required for the predefined "input" file or for
other files associated with interactive devices.

>but not wildly difficult.
>There is really no excuse for compilers not to implement lazy i/o.

True.

-- 
Norman Diamond, Sony Corp. (diamond%ws.sony.junet@uunet.uu.net seems to work)
  Should the preceding opinions be caught or     |  James Bond asked his
  killed, the sender will disavow all knowledge  |  ATT rep for a source
  of their activities or whereabouts.            |  licence to "kill".