Hi, Daniel Krueger <keen...@googlemail.com> skribis:
> If you have it mixed you can do some, say hacking, where you see it > works but you can't see anywhere what you're exactly doing, most of it > is hidden in the guile implementation, which interprets > %default-port-conversion-strategy and gives you the coding. In one > case you maybe rely on %default-port-conversion-strategy normally > being UTF-8 and then someone sets it to something else, which could > give some hard to track errors. (You mean %default-port-encoding, right?) I think this is an argument against %default-port-encoding, because the “clarity” problem described here applies just the same for purely textual ports. > I think explicity just makes code much clearer and I think seperating > textual and binary ports leads to more explicity, that's my point of > view.. Yeah, I understand the idea, but I’m not sure how it translates to concrete use cases. ;-) Thanks for your feedback! Ludo’.
