Subject: bug#12216: peek-char incorrectly *CONSUMES* eof

From: "David A. Wheeler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:43:01 -0400 (EDT)

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:13:39 -0400, Mark H Weaver <[email-masked]> wrote:
> One extra check per read primitive is hardly enough of a cost to
> consider abandoning correctness, IMO.

Though I've not reviewed this code, I *think* you'd only need to check when the buffer is empty.  When the buffer is empty, it'll take a while for the OS to fill it anyway, far more than checking a boolean value.

--- David A. Wheeler