[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AC_C_BIGENDIAN vs. Darwin

From: Matt Watson
Subject: Re: AC_C_BIGENDIAN vs. Darwin
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 14:55:26 -0700

My vote too. How often does configure come across a system which doesn't have a macro defining the byte order?

I've done this for now in the Darwin OpenSSH sources:

#if (defined(BYTE_ORDER) && defined(BIG_ENDIAN) && (BYTE_ORDER == BIG_ENDIAN)) || defined(WORDS_BIGENDIAN)


On Monday, June 25, 2001, at 01:30 PM, Mike Castle wrote:

On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 01:51:27PM -0700, Matt Watson wrote:
I'm trying to figure out the best way to fix this. Is the

Fix the code so it doesn't require knowledge of the endianess of the

Personally, I'd vote for getting rid of AC_C_BIGENDIAN.  No need to in
supporting poor programming.

Mike Castle address@hidden
    We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan.  -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]