Re: about lposix

["David Burgess" <dburgess@...>]

May I suggest that we split the problem into two.
Namely; os and io. There are functions that are truly OS based e.g.
putenv(), there are functions which are truly IO based e.g. read() and
there are OS functions which operate on the IO system like rename().

I think the pure OS issue is easer to address in some ways so maybe
an approach that starts with these.

A generic IO interface that could be used for things other than ANSI IO
I think would be a helpful thing. So even if the implementation is not
always provided, define the interface. e.g. f:read(), f:write() etc and
define what to do when a particular IO system does not support the
interface (e.g. read only systems) and define what to do when the
target system has more than one IO system.

This also again raises the question about remove(), rename() being in the
os library rather than the io library.

db

Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo wrote:
> - The OS library included in the official Lua distribution is lacking many
>   important OS features because it is restricted to what ANSI C provides.
>   So, there is a clear need for better libraries to access OS services.