Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Proposal: (*File) ReadAt(b []byte, off int64) (n int, err error) #199

Closed
a-urth opened this issue Aug 24, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

Proposal: (*File) ReadAt(b []byte, off int64) (n int, err error) #199

a-urth opened this issue Aug 24, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@a-urth
Copy link

a-urth commented Aug 24, 2017

I'm missing this particular interface for reading zip archives from sftp.
Its part of os.File implemented interfaces and seems like its doable, can judge only quickly running through the code.
Is there any reasoning why its impossible/not needed?

Also after searching through issues seems like its planned?

@eikenb
Copy link
Member

eikenb commented Dec 22, 2017

Sorry for the long silence on this. Being a feature request for the client, I put it on the back burner and kind of forgot it was there.

Is there any reasoning why its impossible/not needed?

I think it would be possible as it seems like the protocol would support it.
Assuming it would work, there is no real reason for it not being there other than no one did it.

Also after searching through issues seems like its planned?

I have no immediate plans to implement it and I'm currently the primary active developers. My focus is more on the server, more so than the client. I've been fixing bugs in the client, but hadn't given much thoughts to extending it. But I'm always open to pull requests, particularly for the client.

@qrpike
Copy link
Contributor

qrpike commented Apr 10, 2019

This would be quite nice. ZIP package requires it to be able to decode the stream instead of having to download locally, then decode.

@mjgarton
Copy link
Contributor

Isn't it possible just with a Seek followed by Read? There are probably subtleties that I am overlooking.

@greatroar
Copy link
Contributor

This has been fixed by #285, right?

@puellanivis
Copy link
Collaborator

🤦‍♀️ yes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants