Just to pitch in. get-output-string is only applicable on string output ports. Calling it on any other port, is an error. It is up to the implementer to decide whether calling close-port on a string port should do something or nothing. The way R6RS handles this, prevents one from having to expose a potentially leaky abstraction as in SRFI 6.
IMO, the behavior should just be left unspecified in the spirit of R7RS. leppie On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Alex Shinn <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Arthur A. Gleckler <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Shiro Kawai <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> (Oops, I only replied this to Alex. For the record, resending to >>> scheme-reports.) >>> >>> I'm in favor of this feature but I don't push this to be included in >>> r7rs errata. >>> I agree it's too big change, and it's best to leave it undefined for now >>> (or, an error in r7rs-sense). >>> >> >> I agree on both counts. This is not an oversight, not simply a mistake, >> and hence shouldn't be considered an erratum. >> > > Well, it was just an oversight on my part, but since you're disagreeing as > a WG member I won't push and we'll have to leave this unspecified. > > -- > Alex > > > _______________________________________________ > Scheme-reports mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports > > -- http://codeplex.com/IronScheme http://xacc.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
