Re: byteswap.h behavior

[Collin Funk]

On 5/12/24 1:30 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I sense a bit of confusion here. Although POSIX allows <endian.h> symbols 
> like be16toh to be macros, I don't see where it allows be16toh(X) to evaluate 
> X more than once, so an expression like be16toh(i++) has well-defined 
> behavior even though it has a side effect.

Ah, okay that makes sense thanks. I didn't realize that it would be
written explicitly I guess.

I started working on the module a bit using the POSIX specification.
When writing the test module I noticed that glibc doesn't define
uint16_t, uint32_t, and uint64_t in endian.h.

Does glibc take bug reports for that or is it waiting for the
specification to be official (i.e. not a draft)? I should probably
request a bugzilla account anyways so I can report bugs...

Collin