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!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!news.uunet.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada compiler differences References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:48:30 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.223.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1098290808 198.96.223.163 (Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:46:48 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:46:48 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5533 Date: 2004-10-20T12:48:30-04:00 List-Id: 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). ASN.1 is just a different representation. So in addition to Mark's point below, I fail to see why this is important here. > I am not quite sure how this comment is relevant to the OP's question on > writing portable software. Are you suggesting to the OP that they use > something like an ASN.1 library instead of Posix functions? If so, how > is that "better" for the problem I described? > > --Mark -- Warren W. Gay VE3WWG http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg