Re: Is the documentation for Perl 5.20 'pack' correct?

But that is a different number :)

https://metacpan.org/pod/perlfunc#pack says

The integer formats s, S, i, I, l, L, j, and J
...
For example, a 4-byte integer 0x12345678 (305419896 decimal) would be 
+ordered natively (arranged in and handled by the CPU registers) into 
+bytes as

    0x12 0x34 0x56 0x78  # big-endian
    0x78 0x56 0x34 0x12  # little-endian
[download]

So I type

$ perl -V:byteorder
byteorder='1234';

$ perl -e"print 0x12345678 "
305419896

$ perl -e"print unpack q{H*}, pack q{N*}, 0x12345678 "
12345678

$ perl -e"print unpack q{H*}, pack q{N*}, 305419896 "
12345678

$ perl -e"print sprintf q{%x}, 305419896 "
12345678
[download]

Which seems to agree with above and N An unsigned long (32-bit) in "network" (big-endian) order.

N packs 305419896 correctly as big-endian, and my machine is big endian (as sprintf shows)

Comment on Re: Is the documentation for Perl 5.20 'pack' correct? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Is the documentation for Perl 5.20 'pack' correct? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jul 07, 2015 at 00:34 UTC
The docs don't say the output of `perl -V:byteorder` has any relationship to `0x12345678`. It simply (and correctly) says it's `1234` or `12345678` on LE systems.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Is the documentation for Perl 5.20 'pack' correct? by Anonymous Monk on Jul 07, 2015 at 00:43 UTC
The docs don't say the output of perl -V:byteorder has any relationship to 0x12345678. It simply (and correctly) says it's 1234 or 12345678 on LE systems. You're a great communicator ikegami	[reply]
Re^4: Is the documentation for Perl 5.20 'pack' correct? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jul 07, 2015 at 00:46 UTC
Thanks! I've always found that adding runnable examples and diagrams help a lot.	[reply]