From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,4ef4bf3098ab117 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news.illinois.net!attcg1!ip.att.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada compiler differences Date: 21 Oct 2004 08:54:14 -0500 Organization: LJK Software Message-ID: <+Lb8wu$Il5Pz@eisner.encompasserve.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1098366787 27264 192.135.80.34 (21 Oct 2004 13:53:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:53:07 +0000 (UTC) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5580 Date: 2004-10-21T08:54:14-05:00 List-Id: In article , "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" writes: > Mark H Johnson wrote: >> Larry Kilgallen wrote: >>> In article , Mark H Johnson >>> writes: >>> >>> [snip big endian TCP/IP example] >> >> >>>> That particular issue has nothing to do with Ada; you have the same >>>> problem with C or other languages. >>> >>> In particular, it has to do with the fact that TCP/IP was devised on >>> an ad-hoc basis rather than using an underlying marshalling technique >>> such as promoted by ASN.1. > > The marshalling technique required by ASN.1 requires that all hosts > do "marshalling", whereas big endian machines do not require it > at all (assuming size matches). And as someone who frequents little-endian machines, I can choose some non-IP protocol a more friendly (to me) one that was designed with no thought to endian portability.