On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 23:10 +0100, fons adriaensen wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 10:21:39PM +0100, torbenh@email-addr-hidden wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 03:50:26PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> >
> > > Why do you use big-endian on the wire, requiring a double swap for x86
> > > <-> x86? Wouldn't LE make more sense, especially as PPC Macs become
> > > unavailable?
> >
> > well i am not in a position to redefine ntohl and htonl.
>
> Is it true on the common platforms that using ntohl and htonl on
> floats will always result in compatible data on the wire or in a
> file ? In other words, are floats byte-swapped consistently w.r.t.
> the Intel format on all big-endian systems ?
network byte order was defined to be big-endian in the early 1980s.
those two functions create big-endian 32 bit representations regardless
of the host platform.
--p
Received on Tue Mar 14 04:15:05 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 14 2006 - 04:15:10 EET