[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
> - The procedures for opening files for output
now accept a
> file-options argument.
Sorry to keep bothing you with that,
but I noticed two potential problems with the
way this was solved in the SRFI:
1. File options do not have to have
an external representation.
2. It is a little tedious to check,
but are you sure the file-options are always passed
around with the constructors? Can I
retrieve the file-options used for opening a
particular reader/writer/... from the
My point is that it would be a great
benefit portability if Scheme systems could
at least *handle* the file options of
any other Scheme systems. This idea is
fragile in this sense that it can be
broken at any time (e.g. procedures as options),
but this SRFI might be the place to
lay down the infrastructure for supporting it.
Apart from that I noticed that the /file-options/
argument is mandatory. Is that really
the intention? Shouldn't it be optional,
with the obligation for the implementation
to provide a reasonable default behavior?
Dr. Sebastian Egner
Philips Research Laboratories
Prof. Holstlaan 4 (WDC 1-051, 1st floor, room 51)
5656 AA Eindhoven
tel: +31 40 27-43166
fax: +31 40 27-44004