From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Feb 7 1:57:44 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mailhub.fokus.gmd.de (mailhub.fokus.gmd.de [193.174.154.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AED2037B69E; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 01:57:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from beagle (beagle [193.175.132.100]) by mailhub.fokus.gmd.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA01306; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:44:55 +0100 (MET) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:44:55 +0100 (CET) From: Harti Brandt To: Boris Popov Cc: , Subject: Re: CFR: Sequential mbuf read/write extensions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Boris Popov wrote: BP>> Using 'word' and 'doubleword' is rather confusing (when speeking of words BP>> I would think of 32 bit nowadays). BP> BP> Well, it depends. For me 'word', 'dword' and 'qword' are clear BP>from the good old 8bit days :) BP> BP> If numbers in the function names looks good I can live with it. Well, I just looked back to the bus_space stuff and discovered, that they use suffixes of _[1234] to count the number of bytes the functions operate on. Perhaps this is a better variant? Anyway, I think, numbers are much clearer, than words in this case (As an example, what does ntohl operate on if longs are 64 bit??). As a side note: Someone told me that Mickeysoft is trying to persuade the C standardisation people to drop the requirement that longs should not be shorter than int's. This is, he said, because of their braindamage with DWORD in -zillions of header files... If I look how they continue to cripple C, this may also slip through :-( harti -- harti brandt, http://www.fokus.gmd.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private brandt@fokus.gmd.de, harti@begemot.org, lhbrandt@mail.ru To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message