John Cowan wrote:
> Currently, the procedures standard-input-port, standard-output-port,
> and standard-error-port are very vague. One does not know if one will
> get a binary or a textual port, though a textual port is encouraged;
> one does not know if it is safe to close the port or not.
>
> I suggest that the definition be firmed up: the port returned must
> be fresh and binary.
How do you see the relationship between (current-output-port)
and (standard-output-port)?
If as currently specified we have that (current-output-port)
is initially bound to (standard-output-port), then you have the
problem that you've just broken "hello world":
(display "hello world")
We really don't people to have to deal with transducers just
to write hello-world-level programs.
One possible approach is that (current-output-port) gets
lazily initialized to a textual stream bound to (standard-output-port),
on first use.
--
--Per Bothner
per_at_bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/
Received on Thu Feb 08 2007 - 20:33:01 UTC