[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] only 'big' and 'little' as endiannness may not be enough

From: Anton van Straaten <anton>
Date: Thu Oct 19 01:03:48 2006

Admin note: the message referred to below was resubmitted as a formal
comment and has now been processed as such.


Shiro Kawai wrote:
> Submitter: Shiro Kawai
> Email address: shiro_at_acm.org
> Issue type: Enhancement
> Priority: Minor
> Component: Libraries
> Report version: 5.91
> Summary: only 'big' and 'little' as endiannness may not be enough
Received on Thu Oct 19 2006 - 01:04:29 UTC