Re: [boost] [boost::endian] Request for comments/interest

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