[R6RS] `open-string-output-port' is the same as
sperber at informatik.uni-tuebingen.de
Sun Aug 27 03:43:10 EDT 2006
dyb at cs.indiana.edu writes:
>> Just a note to make sure everybody's aware of that.
> This probably makes perfect sense, but can you please explain briefly why
> this is (and should be) so? Also, why does it take a transcoder argument?
> For that matter, why do the open-file-input-port and open-file-output-port
> procedures take a transcoder argument? I thought we'd decided to
> eliminate it.
We decided that every port may have an associated transcoder. (Even
though the actual I/O operations don't use it by default.) To me,
that seemed to imply that, upon creating a port, this transcoder may
be specified, as there's no other means to do that. So, in the
current draft, *all* port-creation procedures accept a transcoder.
(It looks like the same transcoder as before, but in fact, it got
deleted and then added again in a new role.) This also causes the
wrinkle and `open-string-...-port' I mentioned.
As we did not decide explicitly, I sent the note.
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
More information about the R6RS