John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> writes:
> IMHO it would be better if the utf{16,32}->string functions were able
> to take an additional argument specifying whether the endianness is
> mandatory (BOM is treated as a character) or optional (if BOM is present,
> believe it, otherwise use the endianness as a default).
If this change were made, should the endianness even be optional? I.e.
(utf16->string b (endianness big) #f)
would be equivalent to what's currently
(utf16->string b)
Right?
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla
Received on Sun May 27 2007 - 05:27:32 UTC