From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Nov 25 00:10:12 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E658D16A4CF; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:10:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.157.42])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4F79743FE0; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:10:10 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.org)
Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (Ugrondar@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	hAP8A8eJ099414;	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:10:08 GMT
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.org)
Received: (from Ugrondar@localhost)hAP8A8ls099413;
	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:10:08 GMT	(envelope-from mark@grondar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: storm.FreeBSD.org.uk: Ugrondar set sender to
	mark@grondar.org using -f
Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])hAP88ODw039675;
	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:08:24 GMT	(envelope-from mark@grondar.org)
From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org>
Message-Id: <200311250808.hAP88ODw039675@grimreaper.grondar.org>
To: David Schultz <das@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:13:08 PST."
             <20031125011308.GA98148@VARK.homeunix.com> 
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:08:24 +0000
Sender: mark@grondar.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=5.0
	tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,FROM_NO_LOWER,IN_REP_TO
	version=2.55
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp)
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Size-independent byte order swapping functions. 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:10:13 -0000

David Schultz writes:
> > I'm not sure if dedicated epanic() is the best way to implement out-of-rang
> e
> > errors prevention - the more handy solution should cause compile error.
> 
> See CTASSERT.

There is an extremely limited number of sizes that are possible here,
even with weird/theoretical architectures like 256-bit machines. Doesn't
it make sense just to presume that out-of-range is impossible, and recode
for default "if (sizeof(x) == 1) return x;" (ignore syntax) ?

M
--
Mark Murray
iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH