A new custom port sounds like the right idea. The `reencode-input-port`
and ``reencode-output-port` implementations in
"collects/racket/port.rkt" are tied to byte converters, but they should
be the right idea and could be generalized to other conversion
functions. You might have to copy them for now, but you could propose
changes so that future Racket versions would have the right
abstraction.
Matthew
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Racket Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
> to
racket-users...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/2a29be0f-382d-44ee-b691-91c6b527f
> c48n%
40googlegroups.com.