Peter Bex peter@xs4all.nl writes:
Ah, very good!
I have nothing to comment on this, so I'm just attaching them as-is,
plus a signed-off-by line, so the next guy can just sign it off and
push. :)
Thanks!
Thanks from me as well, I've pushed the patches and closed the ticket.
Moritz
Hi all,
Here are two small patches around `read-line`. The first just removes
some dead code in extras' definition of the procedure, while the second
fixes #1004 by making `##sys#scan-buffer-line` treat lone carriage
returns as line terminators. This resolves the difference in behavior
Moritz
Evan Hanson scripsit:
I think this normalizes CR/LF handling for `read-line` across
all the port types (though interestingly it doesn't make it quite
R7RS-compatible, since that specifies that multiple carriage returns
should be collapsed when followed by a linefeed, rather than just one).
I
On 2013-10-31 9:43, John Cowan wrote:
I think you misread the last as a sequence of carriage return characters
followed by a linefeed character.
*rubs eyes, reads twice*
So I did, multiple times. Thanks, that's a relief, it's much more sane
(unlike the way I must be going).
Evan
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 08:59:24PM +1300, Evan Hanson wrote:
Hi all,
Here are two small patches around `read-line`. The first just removes
some dead code in extras' definition of the procedure, while the second
fixes #1004 by making `##sys#scan-buffer-line` treat lone carriage
returns as
