Rob,
The term "network byte order" means the same to everyone who has had to learn what endianness is. Why would one want ignore that the term "network byte order" has real meaning in an endianness library?
Because this is an endian library and not a network library. Like others on this thread, I think you are making the assumption that the main use for "endian" swapping is to do with networking. Endian swapping is a more general utility and hence my resistance to including terms such as "network byte order" within it.
That there are legitimate use cases for sending little-endian data over the network is, to me, irrelevant.
I am sorry but I am having trouble interpreting this sentence. I presume you didn't for it to be inflamatory - could you perhaps reword it so I can understand what you are trying to say?
Acknowledging "network byte order" in the interface does not prescribe anything. I am suggesting is that it should be a consistent synonym for "big endian".
Then the answer is "no" for the reason I spelled out above. It would be innapropriate for a low-level library such as an endian swapper to dictate application policies. Tom