Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 09 Mar 1999 19:25:16 +0100 | Subject | Re: Linux/IA-64 byte order | From | (Hans-Peter Jansen) |
| |
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999 22:44:22 -0800 (PST), Linus Torvards wrote: > > No, I'm arguing AGAINST using BE. > > I know there are folks out there who like BE, but let's just face it: the > PC platform is LE, and will stay so. Going to mixed-mode just because > misguided people like the old BE format is not an option I am willing to > entertain. > > The computing world would be better off with just one byte order, that > byte order isn't going to be BE. > > Linus >
Take it easy, BE folks, LE is better, because i.e. error detection of network protocols, which are normally BE. If you coders forget to swap a single short, LE will easily show up (aka. won't work).
It's not a bug, it's a feature.
If Linus had started his project on a Mac, this world would think the other way around. (Isn't Transmeta working on a 86xxx clone?)
I feel for you. Linus, because I can imagine, that you can't simply switch of the brain-inherent byte swapper. But isn't it terrible to remember the data structures (at least the difference between strings and more than 8 bit values). If we stick now on LE, I would vote for redefining the network byte order on the long run...
Hans-Peter
(who ported some protocol stuff from BE to LE, some time ago) (knowing now the deficits of C preprocessor macros for that reason)
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |