Number: 1415

Date: 14-Jun-84 12':23':30

Submitter: Sannella.PA

Source: Halasz.pa

Subject: Want arg in COPYBYTES/COPYFILE to call fn every N bytes transfered

Assigned To: 

Attn: 

Status: Declined

In/By: 

Problem Type: Design - Impl

Impact: Annoying

Difficulty: Easy

Frequency: Everytime

Priority: Perhaps

System: Language Support

Subsystem: Other

Machine: 

Disk: 

Lisp Version: 

Source Files: 

Microcode Version: 

Memory Size: 

File Server: 

Server Software Version: 

Disposition: 

Description: '
Date': 13 Jun 84 17':22 PDT'
From': Halasz.pa'
Subject': Lisp': Copyfile/Copybytes needs to call a function every N bytes transferred'
To': LispSupport.pa'
cc': Halasz.pa'
'
Lisp System Date':  8-Jun-84 14':02':40'
Machine': Dorado (Halasz)'
Microcode version': 24,4'
Memory size': 10000'
Frequency': Always'
Impact': Moderate'
'
Currently in COPYBYTES/COPYFILE there is no way to show a display showing every N bytes transfered as the FTP cursor does in the alto exec.  There should be two additinal arguments to COPYBYTES/COPYFILE, EveryNBytes and  DisplayFn.  EveryNBytes COPYBYTES/COPYFILE should call DisplayFn which can then update whatever display the caller desires.'
'
Frank'
'
-----'
'
Date': 13 Jun 84 18':40 PDT'
From': JonL.pa'
Subject': Re': Lisp': Copyfile/Copybytes needs to call a function every N bytes transferred'
In-reply-to': Halasz.pa''s message of 13 Jun 84 17':22 PDT'
To': Halasz.pa'
cc': LispSupport.pa'
'
I second that suggeston!'
'
-- JonL --'
'
-----'
'
Date': 30 Jun 84 01':21 PDT'
From': Masinter.pa'
Subject': AR#1415 declined'
To': Halasz'
cc': LispSupport'
'
I''ve changed AR#1415 from Open (should have been Wish) to Declined. In general, I''m opposed to extra args to special functions.'
'
COPYBYTES can be handled simply by writing your own loop which copies N bytes at a time, e.g., instead of'
'
(COPYBYTES old new), you can'
'
(do (COPYBYTES old new 1000) (displayfn) while (NOT (EOFP old]'
'
For COPYFILE to do the same thing, you have to roll your own, but I still think it is better than adding barnicles to the interface of what is otherwise a simple function.'
'
'


Workaround: 

Test Case: 

Edit-By: masinter

Edit-Date: 13-Jul-84 16':38':43