|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: Section 4.1 clarificationsJulo, > The integer representation was discussed a long time ago on the > list and it was decided that decimal should be allowed as it might > be copied from some human readable tables. I would hate to make > this type of changes this late. I agree that decimal encoding should be retained for NUMERIC CONSTANTS, for the reasons you state. However, I do not believe it makes any sense to allow decimal representations of BINARY ITEMS. I think a concrete example might help here. I am in the process of implementing CHAP authentication. Section 10.5 of the spec states that CHAP_A and CHAP_I are "numbers" and CHAP_C and CHAP_R are "binary items and their binary length (not the length of the character string that represents them in encoded form) MUST not exceed 1024 bytes." When I parse CHAP_A and CHAP_I, which I'm calling "numeric constants," I'll allow decimal or hexadecimal representations, but I certainly won't be able to cope with a number whose decoded value is wider than 4 bytes . . . and I doubt that anyone else will, either. [Let's face the fact that unless they are explicitly told to expect decoded values longer than, say, 4 bytes, implementers will use stroul() or its equivalent in a situation like this.] When I parse CHAP_C and CHAP_R, which I'm calling "binary items," I expect numbers whose decoded values could be up to 1024 bytes long. I can easily convert hexadecimal or base-64 representations of such values into binary data; however, I WILL NOT be able to cope with decimal encoding, which in this case could have up to 2,467 digits . . . and I doubt that anyone else will, either. (The "human readable tables" argument goes out the window in this case as well . . . who will be typing those 2,467 decimal digits?) As the wording of Section 10.5 already shows, there is a need to make a distinction between "numeric constants" ("numbers") and "binary items." I am only suggesting that this be done consistently throughout the spec, with a single clear definition for each term. Michael -- Michael J. Krueger mailto:michael.krueger@windriver.com Wind River Networks http://www.windriver.com 500 Wind River Way phone: 510-749-2130 Alameda, CA 94501 fax: 510-749-2010
Home Last updated: Thu Apr 25 17:18:27 2002 9794 messages in chronological order |