Re: [boost] Portable binary integers [was generic polyvalent I/O]

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-11-16 16:00:23

At 03:23 PM 11/16/2000 -0500, David Abrahams wrote:

 >My feeling has always been that a compact, machine-independent,
 >variable-length number representation (e.g. high bit set indicates the 
end
 >of the number) was the way to go if you care about portability at all.

A variable-length representation is great, but not for many fixed length 
record files.  Furthermore, a primary use is with data created by others 
over whom we have no control.  So what you are talking about is useful, but 
not for all applications.

 > The
 >length of an int/long/char/short/wchar_t/float/double... on any given
 >machine is too variable to make this work otherwise.

Several of my clients have been moving portable binary integer between the 
largest mainframes and tiny embedded systems and everything in between for 
15 years now.  It works, works well, and is very trouble free as long as 
you keep it simple.  The only practical limitation is the  machine must be 
able to do 8-bit byte I/O or multiples thereof.

--Beman