|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: Section 4.1 clarificationsI am not sure that a loop is complex code but we could limit ourselves to 128 bit integers to cover at least some addresses. Julo
Pat, > I think Michael's point is that the decimal encoding for a 1024 > byte binary is around 2500 characters (if I've done the math > right) while the hexadecimal encoding is 2050 characters and > someone anticipating the binary might not have made wherever they > store the string before conversion big enough for the extra ~450 > characters. > > The extra storage is small compared to the amount of data one may > be moving later once the connection is up, but I also don't see > the readability argument as applying to these large constants. Actually, I'm concerned neither with storage space nor with speed, but rather with code complexity. Unlike hexadecimal and base-64 encoding, there is not a simple correspondence between decimal digits in the string representation and bit locations in the binary item. Most implementation of decimal-to-binary conversion functions like strtoul() do integer arithmetic to obtain the binary representation, but this isn't feasible for binary items larger than 4 (or, at an absolute maximum, 8) bytes. Show me a simple algorithm or a widely available library function for converting a 2,467-digit string to its 1024-byte binary representation, and I'll use it; otherwise, support for decimal encoding of large binary items seems like a needless complication that pays back very little added value. 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: Fri Apr 26 13:18:22 2002 9811 messages in chronological order |