Subject: Re: [boost] [boost::endian] Request for comments/interest
From: Tomas Puverle (Tomas.Puverle_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-30 10:13:01
Rob,
> The term "network byte order" means the same to everyone who has had to
> learn what endianness is. Why would one want ignore that the term
> "network byte order" has real meaning in an endianness library?
Because this is an endian library and not a network library. Like others on
this thread, I think you are making the assumption that the main use
for "endian" swapping is to do with networking. Endian swapping is a more
general utility and hence my resistance to including terms such as "network
byte order" within it.
> That there are legitimate use cases for sending little-endian data over the
> network is, to me, irrelevant.
I am sorry but I am having trouble interpreting this sentence. I presume you
didn't for it to be inflamatory - could you perhaps reword it so I can
understand what you are trying to say?
> Acknowledging "network byte order" in the interface does not prescribe
> anything. I am suggesting is that it should be a consistent synonym for
> "big endian".
Then the answer is "no" for the reason I spelled out above. It would be
innapropriate for a low-level library such as an endian swapper to dictate
application policies.
Tom