John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > William D Clinger scripsit: > >> > The three listed buffer modes are none, line, and block. >> >> FYI, Larceny's preferred buffer mode for interactive output >> ports is datum. The buffer-mode syntax does not allow datum, >> which is one of several reasons that syntax is deprecated >> in Larceny. > > Formal comment #185, which was adopted by the editors, says that line > buffering is explicitly implementation-dependent; the draft should be > changed to make it so.
Indeed: Thanks for pointing this out. Does "line for flushing upon line endings or other implementation-defined separators and reading up to line endings or other implementation-defined separators" work? > I think it would be within editorial discretion to extend the license > in 8.2.4 to provide implementation-dependent results on nonstandard > eol-symbols to buffer-mode-symbols as well. That I don't think I can do. I wish the possibility of other buffer modes had been suggested prior to the ratification candidate. -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
