Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Thursday 14 July 2011 06:27:47 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >> On 7/14/11 5:51 AM, Regan Heath wrote: >> > That's my point. I need 8/16/32/64/128 bit versions and it really would >> > be better if there were general variants. My version are less than >> > optimal, but do use intrinsics where possible. Someone else can do a >> > far better job than I, and it really should be done once, by that >> > person. Surely we have the infrastructure for someone to add this to >> > phobos? If something this simple can't or won't be done, what hope do >> > we have!? >> >> I think we should have these functions in std.bitmanip: >> >> T toBigEndian(T)(T val) if (isArithmetic!T || isSomeChar!T); >> T toLittleEndian(T)(T val) if (isArithmetic!T || isSomeChar!T); >> T bigEndianToNative(T)(T val) if (isArithmetic!T || isSomeChar!T); >> T littleEndianToNative(T)(T val) if (isArithmetic!T || isSomeChar!T); >> >> That means all characters, all integers, and all floating point numbers. >> The implementations would opportunistically use intrinsics and other >> specialized means. >> >> The documentation should specify the relationship to htonl and ntohl. >> >> If there's a need for converting endianness of larger buffers, we might >> add: >> >> ubyte[] toBigEndian(ubyte[] val); >> ubyte[] toLittleEndian(ubyte[] val); >> ubyte[] bigEndianToNative(ubyte[] val); >> ubyte[] littleEndianToNative(ubyte[] val); >> >> They'd use std.algorithm.reverse internally as needed. >> >> It's a sweet piece of work. Anyone have the time to prepare a pull >> request? > > I decided to take a crack at it, and it seems to be going pretty well, > except that I can't seem to get the floating point values right. Somehow, > when I compare a floating point value with the same value except that it's > had its endianness swapped twice, they return true for is but false for > ==, which makes absolutely no sense to me. There's obviously either > something that I don't understand about floating point values (or the > relationship between is and ==) or a bug in dmd. It'd be one thing if I > couldn't get the values to reverse properly, but when they're equal > according to is but not ==, I have no idea how that could even be > possible. > > - Jonathan M Davis
I've managed to get floating points working with unions. How are you doing it? Maybe you're triggering a bug somewhere
