Received: by whizzer.wpd.sgi.com (921026.SGI.NOSTRIP/911001.SGI)
	 id AA16048; Tue, 17 Aug 93 13:37:36 GMT
Received: from sgi.sgi.com by whizzer.wpd.sgi.com via SMTP (921026.SGI.NOSTRIP/911001.SGI)
	for /usr/people/sam/majordomo/wrapper resend -l tiff -h sgi.sgi.com -f tiff-owner -s -m "-oi -odq -om" tiff-list id AA16040; Tue, 17 Aug 93 06:37:34 -0700
Received: from tango.read.tasc.com by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (920330.SGI/910110.SGI)
	for tiff-relay@whizzer.wpd.sgi.com id AA25541; Tue, 17 Aug 93 06:37:31 -0700
Received: by tango.Read.TASC.COM (920330.SGI/TASC-NONDOM-1.5)
	id AA09229; Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:32:44 -0400
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:32:44 -0400
From: gaile@tango (Gaile G. Gordon)
Message-Id: <9308171332.AA09229@tango.Read.TASC.COM>
To: sam@flake.asd.sgi.com
Cc: tiff@sgi.sgi.com
In-Reply-To: <9308170006.AA16248@flake.asd.sgi.com> (sam@flake.asd.sgi.com)
Subject: Re: byte swapping 16- and 32-bit data
Sender: tiff-owner@sgi.sgi.com



Actually, machine independence, and the fact that I don't need to
worry about byte swapping is one of the big advantages in my mind to
using the tiff library.  Although I wouldn't mind if you added the no
byte swap as an option for cases were efficiency is the primary
concern, I would not be happy if I had to add byte swapping to all my
tiff code.



