> however, the history shows people
> tended to use read-char and write-char (with char->integer
> and integer->char) to pretend binary I/O, which got broken
> beyond ASCII/ISO8859 world.

The WG1 draft charter allows for the possibility of both ASCII-only and
Unicode-aware implementations of small Scheme.  This is one of a bunch of
engineering decisions that depend, it seems to me, on what we expect to be
the more common kind of implementation.  If in fact most implementors will
be either WG2/Unicode or WG1/ASCII, then we might want different defaults
for port behavior in WG1 and WG2.  If in practice most implementations, even
of WG1, are going to be Unicode-aware, then we have to bite the bullet and
have more complicated ideas about WG1 ports.

Unicode is /so/ hairy that, were there no political considerations, it would
be high on my list of WG2-only features.  That and macros.  :-)

_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss

Reply via email to