phk at phk.freebsd.dk
Wed Sep 14 12:51:32 UTC 2011
In message <306FD881-6140-4DE2-AFF1-95C8079E4187 at xcllnt.net>, Marcel Moolenaar
>Is there a reason not to add ntohq and htonq to the short
>and long versions we (and everyone else) already has?
>I did some googling and htonq and ntohq seem to be de
>facto names used, but oddly enough no OS has them defined.
>It's surreal. Are there better alternatives we should
I prefer the explicit encode/decode functions in <sys/endian.h>
because they don't need to be arch specific and they don't make
assumptions about alignment.
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
More information about the freebsd-arch