From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <359104229c4622713a37f906e086ec14@vitanuova.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] hget
From: rog@vitanuova.com
In-Reply-To: <40688432.9030502@swtch.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:40:10 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4631af94-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> how about hget -1 meaning "try once, then give up."?

no, 'cos it's fine to try again, just as long as you haven't already
written anything.  (and i'll bet that's by far the most common failure
mode).

> down that path lies madness...

hmm. maybe.

however we're already admitting a qualititive difference in types of
file by using the -o option as it is.  (oh no, danger!  danger!  file
seek thread trying to re-establish; apologies!)

at least when you're creating a file, you're reasonably sure you can
seek on it ok (although of course that's not the case for >{}).

i think the default case should be not to seek, because that
will produce less surprises.