On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Reinoud Zandijk wrote:
>  Only point of improval could be the usage of `uint8_t' instead of `char' 
>  since that has an implicit assumption that sizeof(char)=1.

sizeof(char) = 1 by definition of how sizeof works.  sizeof measures in
units of chars, no matter how big a char actually is.

Assuming that a char is the same as an octet is nonportable, however, so
having network code use uint8_t instead of char seems reasonable to me.

--apb (Alan Barrett)