[r6rs-discuss] string->utfX and utfX-string questions

[Michael Sperber]

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, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla