Larceny and Petit Larceny v0.95 implement the Unicode semantics as John Cowan described it, with the following exception:
> If no BOM is present, the process SHOULD use a > local convention if there is one (this mostly means that Windows UTF-16 > files are typically little-endian), and if not, SHOULD assume big-endian. Larceny and Petit Larceny v0.95 do not use local conventions. This will be corrected in a future version. Note that the R6RS does not specify codecs for UTF-16BE, UTF-16LE, UTF-32BE, and UTF-32LE. The removal of these codecs from an earlier draft was suggested by John Cowan. Apart from the utf16->string and utf32->string procedures, which allow the semantics of UTF-16BE, UTF-16LE, UTF-32BE, and UTF-32LE to be specified via explicit arguments instead of a transcoder, Larceny and Petit Larceny do not support those four encoding forms. Larceny and Petit Larceny extend the R6RS by allowing the utf16->string and utf32->string to accept a single argument, in which case they decode the string according to the UTF-16 or UTF-32 encoding forms (respectively). In my opinion, the removal of single-argument utf16->string and utf32->string is an error in the R6RS caused by misinterpretation of John Cowan's response of 27 May 2007 to an ambiguous question posed by Mike Sperber [1,2]. I hope this mistake will soon be corrected by ERR5RS and by an R7RS. Will [1] http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2007-May/002414.html [2] http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2007-May/002425.html _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
