Hi :) On Wed 16 Jan 2013 16:44, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> skribis: > >> But no, currently the answer is locale-specific. It encodes the string >> according to the current locale, then decodes it from that encoding. If >> your locale can't encode the string, tough luck for you! > > SRFI-6 uses Unicode-capable ports since > ecb48dccbac6b8fdd969f50a23351ef7f4b91ce5 I have never heard of this srfi before; I always thought our string ports "just worked" :P > Otherwise, %default-port-encoding governs (info "(guile) String Ports"): But why? The documentation does not say it; it merely spends electrons describing how to make string ports actually accept all characters. You mention one use case: > as a smart way to do encoding conversion. But surely this is not a common case and is adequately handled by set-port-encoding!, potentially via an optional argument. > The thing is, unlike R6RS, our ports can be used both for textual and > binary I/O. I am aware of this, and not arguing against it :) > This has been discussed at length already, and I think all the pros and > cons have been written already. :-) "What from your father you’ve inherited, You must earn again, to own it straight." -- Faust :) Flippantly yours, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
