Subject: Re: uint32_t & u_int32_t
To: Masao Uebayashi <uebayasi@pultek.co.jp>
From: David Laight <david@l8s.co.uk>
List: current-users
Date: 12/17/2002 10:39:29
> uint16_t htons __P((uint16_t)) __attribute__((__const__));
On a slightly separate note the above prototype would actually
be better if it were:
uint32_t htons __P((uint32_t)) __attribute__((__const__));
Although the domain is [0..65535] there is no reason to force
the compiler to go through all the hoops that a 16bit function
parameter and result requires.
(OTOH the posix defn has uint16_t here - 'cos I didn't but a CR
in early enough)
David
--
David Laight: david@l8s.co.uk