Tue, 7 Aug 2001 20:48:36 -0700
> It certainly makes sense from the point of view that you can't write after
> you shutdown the write side, but I think that it would be surprising. For
> instance, if you have your standard functions that use
> handle e => (close ???; raise e)
> then the close would raise an exception because the stream is already closed.
> I don't have a super strong feeling about this though. The whole shutdown
> thing is garbage from Bill Joy who just does not know how to design things
Actually, closing an already closed instream or outstream is OK. But it now
occurs to me that we've got the dependence wrong. Why not have close call the
appropriate shutdown function?