On Wed Oct 7, 2026 at 8:33 PM JST, John Hubbard wrote: > On 10/7/26 5:48 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: >> On Wed Oct 7, 2026 at 12:43 PM JST, Alexandre Courbot wrote: >>> On Mon Sep 28, 2026 at 5:42 PM JST, Eliot Courtney wrote: >>> <...> >>> ... and that's all I could find on this patch. I particularly like how >>> the examples have turned out! >> >> ... although maybe the Sashiko comments are worth considering too. Nova >> does depend on little-endian, but it probably wouldn't cost us much to >> e.g. call `to_le_bytes` instead of `to_ne_bytes` to make the code more >> portable. > > I recall having this conversation before, and I've tried to consistently > say "no". It's not a real thing, and if it ever becomes one it will be > a very big deal, not something we would overlook.
I agree on principle when writing endian-neutral code requires some extra infrastructure or considerably more code, but here we are talking about trading a call to `to_ne_bytes` for one to `to_le_bytes`, which is zero effort. ... although the Sashiko warning on `extend_with_padding` *would* require more than just a method call to properly manage arrays of `u32` and `u64`, so maybe we don't need to fix them all, or any at all for that matter since half-fixed code is still broken code.
