Boost logo

Boost :

From: Caleb Epstein (caleb.epstein_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-15 15:11:54

On 6/15/05, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Caleb Epstein <caleb.epstein_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > On 6/15/05, Iain K. Hanson <iain.hanson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> >> I think this would be a very useful addition for networking. Should it
> >> go in utility? I'd prefer not to have it in detail.
> >
> > I added it to detail, where I think it should stay until 1.33 goes out
> > the door. We can move it someplace more suitable after that.
> >
> > Does this make sense?
> Is it (whatever it is) an implementation detail or just a prerelease
> feature? If the latter, detail:: is the wrong feature. Maybe
> prerelease:: ?

Well, "it" is just two macros: BOOST_BYTE_ORDER and one of
your target CPU.

The BOOST_*_ENDIAN macros are (currently) only needed to fix the
serialization test test_demo_portable_archive on big-endian platforms
and to tailor <boost/detail/limits.hpp> to a given architecture. I
added BOOST_BYTE_ORDER myself for completeness.

I put the header file into boost/detail because:

* Thats where the initial implementation, lifted from
<boost/detail/limits.hpp> was
* I didn't know what the right place for a utility header like this
would be. Perhaps <boost/utility/endian.hpp> as per Iain's
* I didn't want to expose this header publicly (*yet*) as I thought
this might be construed as adding a feature during the release cycle.

I'd be more than happy to move this code someplace more suitable, just
let me know where.

Caleb Epstein
caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at