Subject: Re: [boost] [endian] Some suggestions
From: Tatsuyuki Ishi (ishitatsuyuki_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-04-11 08:54:14
> > 1. Bring back float: make a proper reason for abandon
> > You told about NaN: but it shouldn't apply since you store it in char
> > buffer.
> The problem isn't when storing into the char buffer, but later on a
> different machine or compiler when the char buffer has to be converted to a
> float type.
I know nothing other than float format differences, and my target
platforms are using iec559. I think reinterpret_cast should work: char
data shouldn't be changed as long as stored as char.
> In testing, I even ran into a case were on the same machine and compiler
> the float data failed to round-trip correctly if the program that created
> the file was compiled with a different set of optimization options that the
> program the read the file.
I will be happy if you provide some example.
> > 2. Remove n_bits(endian buffers): completely useless
> > This just look like an alternative to sizeof, and always /8'd when used.
> > What's the meaning of that?
> Please give a specific code example from the docs of what you think should
> be changed. Or submit a pull request.
Since this is breaking API, I'd like you to make the decision to
change it or not.
For detail, this is the endian_buffer definition:
template <order Order, class T, std::size_t n_bits,
align A = align::no>
n_bits looks quite useless here. It's basically sizeof*8.
> > 3. Minor API suggestions
> > Move operator type to endian_buffer: it's not related to arithmetic but
> > just used because it can act like an integer.
> Again, what code is it you think should be changed? Operator value_type()?
> Please submit a pull request.
Exactly: operator value_type(). This will provide much more convenience.
An example: when you specify the size for the array:
dynarray d(size.value()); vs dynarray d(size);
> > Non-const data(): I'm tired to do reinterpret_cast. Look at C++11 vector
> > for a reference.
> What is the motivation? What are the safety implications? What are the
> alternatives? The C++11 (and also C++17) addition of non-cost data()
> members to some standard library containers was supported by motivation and
> safety analysis.
Seems endian_buffer is targeted for using in structs. Then is there
any problem to provide a wrap of reinterpret_cast? At least, it should
be safe by design.
> > Move stream operators to endian_arithmetic: I first thought that was for
> > reading binary. That's basically unused.
> I must be missing something. Why wouldn't stream operators apply to endian
> buffers? A code example might help.
Quite confusing. I first thought that was binary r/w operators that
reads/writes the stream and store the value.
The problem is that, there's no method provided for reading from
binary, so this is also a reason for the previous data() suggestion.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk