News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The descent to C. Parent comment

Re:The descent to C by fanf2 on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @03:49PM (#7139606)
If you are doing unsafe or machine-dependent endurance conversion code, you are almost certainly doing it wrong. http://commandcenter.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/byte-order-falla...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The descent to C by deletes on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @05:02PM (#7140079)
Thank you for that link.

#leaves to check some old code

.

.

.

#comes back

Apparently my younger self knew what he was doing. ( The conversion is done correctly :shocked: )

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The descent to C by mcguire on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @11:38AM (#7144930)
Sometimes I wonder about Rob.

"In fact, C may be part of the problem: in C it's easy to make byte order look like an issue. If instead you try to write byte-order-dependent code in a type-safe language, you'll find it's very hard. In a sense, byte order only bites you when you cheat."

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The descent to C by csmithuk on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @04:55AM (#7142989)
That's a great article - thanks for posting.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The descent to C by fanf2 on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @06:05PM (#7147779)
"endurance"?! Damn you, autocorrect.
[ Parent | on HN ]