Steven Watanabe-4 wrote:
AMDG
On 09/08/2011 12:23 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Tomas Puverle < Tomas.Puverle@morganstanley.com> wrote:
However, as I said, that's my personal preference and last year plenty of people wanted to see the operators included. Perhaps they could be a policy?
endian<..., bool EnableOperators_ > ?
I'll give it some thought, but my initial reaction is that endian is already more complex than I like, so I'm leery of adding yet more complexity.
If you don't want the operators, then don't use them. Having an extra template parameter to disable them seems rather pointless.
Hi, I have separated the endian class into a endian_pack that is integer agnostic and an endian class that behaves as an integer (You could see the details in the Sandbox under endian_ext). Reference docs: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/endian_ext/libs/integer/endian/doc/ht... http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/endian_ext/libs/integer/endian/doc/ht... (Sorry but there is a bad link to the reference) This is not complex and allows to define physical structures that can be used only at the I/O frontier. To separate the concerns and avoid the inefficient arithmetic on endian integers, the example posted on another thread struct file_header { big32_t n_things; .... }; int main() { file_header h; h.n_things = 0; while (....) { ++h.n_things; .... } write(h); .... } could be rewritten as follows to force more efficient code struct file_header { big32_pt n_things; .... }; where big32_pt is a typedef for a 32 bits typedef endian_pack<endianness::big, int_least32_t, 32, alignment::unaligned> big32_pt; int main() { file_header h; int n_things = 0; while (....) { ++n_things; .... } h.n_things = n_things; write(h); .... } Best, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Endian-Review-tp3799423p3800913.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.