🚀 go-pugleaf

Joe Keane <jgk@netcom.com> writes:
] In article <DKIp84.9Az@calcite.rhyolite.com>
] Vernon Schryver <vjs@calcite.rhyolite.com> writes:
] >[ on why application code is byte-order sensitive ]
]
] Sorry, but this is baloney.  The real reasons are ignorance and laziness.
] The other reasons are good excuses but they don't hold up under scrutiny.
]
] At some point, or maybe not, the light goes on in a programmer's head, that
] read and write operate on *bytes* and maybe you should use them that way.
]
] Blasting structures directly to disk or the network is just bad practice.

Yeah, there's a good use of a 64-bit wide PCI bus : sending
bytes over it one at a time. (not)  Admit it : being order-neutral is
slower.  Ask your typical customer wether they'd rather have a
byte-order-neutral OS that runs slower, or a machine-order-dependant
OS that runs faster, and which do you think they will buy ?

[...]
] Saying `but it works on my machine' isn't a sign of a competent programmer.

But if you can say "We have 40 million happy customers", do you care ?
The important thing is to meet your customers needs, not to a slave
to some esoteric aesthetic "goodness" measure.
--
Dennis O'Connor                            doconnor@sedona.intel.com
i960(R) Architecture and Core Design       Not an Intel spokesman.
TIP#518					   Fear is the enemy.