PositionnableStream>>skip: not standard

Another one :-)

In the standard, #skip: should explicetly not raise an error if #skip:
would go after the end. It is said that "A number of objects equal to
the lesser of amount and the size of the receiver's future sequence
values are removed..."

Same question: what do we choose ? If you have other Smalltalk
implementations at hand, what did they choose ?

--
Damien Cassou

"Damien Cassou" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Another one :-)
>
> In the standard, #skip: should explicetly not raise an error if #skip:
> would go after the end. It is said that "A number of objects equal to
> the lesser of amount and the size of the receiver's future sequence
> values are removed..."
>
> Same question: what do we choose ? If you have other Smalltalk
> implementations at hand, what did they choose ?

Didn't someone a few years back write an ANSI compatibility package on
SqueakMap?

Ah, yes:

  "ANSI Compatibility" at
http://map.squeak.org/package/d7011055-4446-4b8e-b6da-e7e32d3389ec and
  "ANSI Tests" at
http://map.squeak.org/package/d3d77bbb-00e4-481f-b38a-9329d813456c

This stuff was obviously written for a fairly old version of Squeak, but
they might help you in your efforts.

frank