X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:25:09 +0200
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: htonl, htons, ntohl and ntohs types
Message-ID: <20060421092508.GA15855@tuxedo.skovlyporten.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403
From: lars AT segv DOT dk (Lars Munch)
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Hello

I have noticed that the types of the functions htonl, htons, ntohs and
ntohl differs from standard (and linux):

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/htonl.html

Cygwin uses:

unsigned long int        ntohl(unsigned long int);
unsigned short int       ntohs(unsigned short int);
unsigned long int        htonl(unsigned long int);
unsigned short int       htons(unsigned short int);

The standard (and Linux) has:

uint32_t htonl(uint32_t hostlong);
uint16_t htons(uint16_t hostshort);
uint32_t ntohl(uint32_t netlong);
uint16_t ntohs(uint16_t netshort);

Is there any reason for this difference?

The difference in the api gives me warnings when porting code from
Linux to Cygwin.

Thanks
Lars Munch

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/