From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: always O_BINARY? Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 12:08:24 +0000 Message-ID: <8738wlhq2v.fsf@neil-laptop.ossau.uklinux.net> References: <87vc9ij5z0.fsf@pobox.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1361707715 17948 80.91.229.3 (24 Feb 2013 12:08:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 12:08:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 24 13:08:56 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U9aNy-0004ju-TI for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 13:08:55 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34479 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U9aNe-0003jq-4F for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 07:08:34 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:36855) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U9aNa-0003jY-6D for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 07:08:31 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U9aNY-0000Kd-Qk for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 07:08:30 -0500 Original-Received: from out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.237]:56409) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U9aNY-0000Io-KK for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 07:08:28 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAJoAKlECYL2b/2dsb2JhbABFwU+BBxdzgh8BAQQBOhwjBQsIAyElDwEEJRABExOIDQq+KI8OB4NAA6AehwSDBw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,727,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="420173344" Original-Received: from host-2-96-189-155.as13285.net (HELO arudy) ([2.96.189.155]) by out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 24 Feb 2013 12:08:26 +0000 Original-Received: from neil-laptop.ossau.uklinux.net.ossau.homelinux.net (host-2-96-189-155.as13285.net [2.96.189.155]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3DE14380AA; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 12:08:25 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: <87vc9ij5z0.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Sun, 24 Feb 2013 12:39:47 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 62.24.128.237 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:15819 Archived-At: Andy Wingo writes: > Hi, > > Just thinking aloud here -- Windows has this O_BINARY thing that > translates CRLF to LF when reading, and LF to CRLF when writing. It > seems to me to be a useless thing. We already have our own i/o > abstractions and should deal with CRLF vs LF in Scheme, I think: > > The (newline) function can write CRLF > The ~% format directive should DTRT > read-line should DTRT > > And since all of our hackers have been on POSIX systems, we're used to > there being no O_BINARY/O_TEXT distinction. > > So, what do you think about always adding O_BINARY to files that Guile > opens? Maybe look at what Emacs on Windows does? I would guess it has the same question, and probably the same answer as you've suggested. Neil