5:31 a.m.
This is another candidate for gnulib ...
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
New in Fedora 11: Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows
programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 70 libraries supprt'd
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW http://www.annexia.org/fedora_mingw
5:41 a.m.
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
This is another candidate for gnulib ...
Yes, indeed.
...
+static inline uint16_t
+htons (x)
+ uint16_t x;
+{
Using old-style function definitions like this is odd,
but then I realized this was probably copied from glibc.
Did you have to make any changes?
ACK.
5:54 a.m.
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 12:41:42PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> This is another candidate for gnulib ...
Yes, indeed.
...
> +static inline uint16_t
> +htons (x)
> + uint16_t x;
> +{
Using old-style function definitions like this is odd,
but then I realized this was probably copied from glibc.
Yes, these are copied from glibc, but ...
Did you have to make any changes?
This patch was a bit of a dog's dinner. The functions also shouldn't
be static(!)
Try this version instead.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
New in Fedora 11: Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows
programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 70 libraries supprt'd
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW http://www.annexia.org/fedora_mingw
8:04 a.m.
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 12:41:42PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > This is another candidate for gnulib ...
>
> Yes, indeed.
>
> ...
> > +static inline uint16_t
> > +htons (x)
> > + uint16_t x;
> > +{
>
> Using old-style function definitions like this is odd,
> but then I realized this was probably copied from glibc.
Yes, these are copied from glibc, but ...
> Did you have to make any changes?
This patch was a bit of a dog's dinner. The functions also shouldn't
be static(!)
Of course ;-)
...
+uint32_t
+htonl (x)
+ uint32_t x;
...
+uint32_t ntohl (uint32_t x) { return htonl (x); }
Looks ok. ACK
Unless you're trying to minimize diffs with glibc,
you may want to make all four definitions be ANSI.
...
+uint16_t
+htons (x)
+ uint16_t x;
...
+uint16_t ntohs (uint16_t x) { return htons (x); }
5924
days inactive
5924
days old
3 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Jim Meyering -
Richard W.M. Jones