From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Sep 14 12:51:32 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A00421065673
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:51:32 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E908FC14
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:51:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter-phk.freebsd.dk [192.168.48.2])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82F285DC8;
	Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:51:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id p8EBPn8H002334;
	Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:25:49 GMT (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:36:49 MST."
	<306FD881-6140-4DE2-AFF1-95C8079E4187@xcllnt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:25:49 +0000
Message-ID: <2333.1315999549@critter.freebsd.dk>
Cc: FreeBSD Arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: ntohq/htonq?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:51:32 -0000

In message <306FD881-6140-4DE2-AFF1-95C8079E4187@xcllnt.net>, Marcel Moolenaar 
writes:

>Is there a reason not to add ntohq and htonq to the short
>and long versions we (and everyone else) already has?
>
>I did some googling and htonq and ntohq seem to be de
>facto names used, but oddly enough no OS has them defined.
>It's surreal. Are there better alternatives we should
>migrate to?

I prefer the explicit encode/decode functions in <sys/endian.h>
because they don't need to be arch specific and they don't make
assumptions about alignment.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.