Boost logo

Boost :

From: Alec Ross (alec_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-10 12:52:37

In message <87k5s3e6bc.fsf_at_grogan.peloton>, David Abrahams
<dave_at_[hidden]> writes
>on Fri Aug 10 2007, Beman Dawes <> wrote:
>> John Zorko wrote:
>>> Hello, all ...
>>> When I use v1.34s boost::filesystem::size() implementation on Mac OSX
>>> (10.4.10, Intel and PPC), I get different results. It appears to be
>>> a byte-ordering issue (since on little-endian machines (I tested on
>>> Windows and OSX Intel) it returns the correct result, while on big-
>>> endian machines (I tested on OSX PPC) it does not). While this is
>>> easy enough to code around, I don't recall reading anything about
>>> byte-ordering issues in the boost::filesystem portability guide, so
>>> i'm wondering if this is intentional?
>> No, certainly not!
>> By different results, do you mean the size that is returned is wrong? Is
>> the size correct if the byte-order is swapped?
>Note the OP said Intel and PPC. The processor type is the only
>determinant of byte ordering that I know of.
But some processors have switchable byte ordering for data access. See
the Bi-endian hardware entry in:

Alec Ross

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