Subject: Re: [boost] [boost::endian] Request for comments/interest
From: Tomas Puverle (tomas.puverle_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-06-02 09:53:23
> This swap_in_place is a no-op if native is big.
A no-op in what respect? I (might) give you that there will be no observable
state change. But from a runtime perspective, I don't agree.
However, there is a much bigger problem with all of the examples using copy,
please see point 25.2.1 bullet 3 below from the C++ standard:
25.2.1 Copy [lib.alg.copy]
template<class InputIterator, class OutputIterator>
OutputIterator copy(InputIterator first, InputIterator last,
1 Effects: Copies elements in the range [first, last) into the range [result,
result + (last
- first)) starting from first and proceeding to last. For each non-negative
integer n <
(last-first), performs *(result + n) = *(first + n).
2 Returns: result + (last - first).
*3 Requires: result shall not be in the range [first, last).*
Unless I am missing something, I don't see why you are implementing
swap_in_place *on top* of the endian types. That just seems backwards to me
(other than being illegal)
Is there a fundamental design issue you can see by implementing the endian types
on top of the functional primitives?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk