Hi Andy,
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 12:16, Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 10:43:59AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 10:30, Aditya Garg <gargaditya08@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 22-04-2025 01:37 pm, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 at 08:48, Aditya Garg <gargaditya08@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > Originally, it was %p4cr (reverse-endian), but on the request of the
> > > maintainers, it was changed to %p4cn.
> >
> > Ah, I found it[1]:
> >
> > | so, it needs more information that this mimics htonl() / ntohl() for
> > networking.
> >
> > IMHO this does not mimic htonl(), as htonl() is a no-op on big-endian.
> > while %p4ch and %p4cl yield different results on big-endian.
> >
> > > So here network means reverse of host, not strictly big-endian.
> >
> > Please don't call it "network byte order" if that does not have the same
> > meaning as in the network subsystem.
> >
> > Personally, I like "%p4r" (reverse) more...
> > (and "%p4ch" might mean human-readable ;-)
>
> It will confuse the reader. h/r is not very established pair. If you really
> wont see h/n, better to drop them completely for now then. Because I'm against
> h/r pair.
I am not against h/n in se, but I am against bad/confusing naming.
The big question is: should it print
(A) the value in network byte order, or
(B) the reverse of host byte order?
If the answer is (A), I see no real reason to have %p4n, as %p4b prints
the exact same thing. Moreover, it leaves us without a portable
way to print values in reverse without the caller doing an explicit
__swab32() (which is not compatible with the %p pass-by-pointer
calling convention).
If the answer is (B), "%p4n using network byte order" is bad/confusing
naming.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
