Re: Re: [RFC] Add pack()/unpack() support for signed integers with specific endianness

Hi Tim, Le dim. 23 nov. 2025 à 15:45, Tim Düsterhus <tim@bastelstu.be> a écrit : > > Initially, endianness modifiers will only be supported for signed integer format codes (s, > > l, q) since unsigned integers already have dedicated endian-specific letters. > > While there are already dedicated alternatives, I feel that restricting > the new modifiers to the lowercase versions would be unnecessarily > restrictive. Since the RFC argues that: > > > 2. Intuitive semantics: The < and > symbols visually suggest byte order direction > > which I agree with, the same argument applies to the uppercase QLS > versions. As a developer I would rather remember l> as "signed long > big-endian" and L> as "unsigned long big-endian" rather than N as > "4-byte network-byte order". > > Since there is no inherent limitation or ambiguity with supporting > modifiers on QLS, I would suggest just allowing it. In fact I think my > PoC patch already supported them. I agree. I just updated the text and tables to reflect the addition of big and little endian unsigned integers throughout the document. > There's also a formatting issue of the “Rationale” in the “Proposed > Solution” section. The text has been cleaned and simplified. Thanks! — Alexandre Daubois