AWARE [SYSTEMS] Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer
AWare Systems, Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer, Home TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive

LibTiff Mailing List

TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive
September 1994

Previous Thread
Next Thread

Previous by Thread
Next by Thread

Previous by Date
Next by Date

Contact

The TIFF Mailing List Homepage
This list is run by Frank Warmerdam
Archive maintained by AWare Systems



Valid HTML 4.01!



Thread

1994.09.16 04:17 "TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by John M Davison
1994.09.16 17:42 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Sam Leffler
1994.09.19 06:55 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Karsten Spang
1994.09.19 15:26 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Sam Leffler
1994.09.19 18:48 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Niles Ritter
1994.09.19 22:48 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Sam Leffler
1994.09.20 00:03 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Joe Moss
1994.09.20 07:00 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Fredrik Lundh
1994.09.19 23:31 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Jim Arnold

1994.09.19 23:31 "Re: TIFF Bit Ordering Versus Fill Order", by Jim Arnold

Using bit field order is a fragile and inconclusive way to
determine bit order.  The order in which the compiler allocates
bit fields has NOTHING to do with the bit order of the values
in the fields themselves.  I've seen compilers that allocate
bit fields in the opposite order for machines with the same
byte/bit order.

Sam, you're better off ignoring all this blather about bit order.
Leave the library alone.  You've already implemented the only
sensible policy.  Trying to do more will make things worse for
the people who do understand the issues, and it will not
enlighten those who do not.

I understand the urge to please one's customers.  You'll please
this customer by doing the right thing: nothing.

Jim Arnold