Article <c0a1d6c39d069350db2fb213fe8feeec@www.novabbs.org>

Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <c0a1d6c39d069350db2fb213fe8feeec@www.novabbs.org>

Deutsch English Français Italiano

<c0a1d6c39d069350db2fb213fe8feeec@www.novabbs.org>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Byte Addressability And Beyond
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 02:15:44 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <c0a1d6c39d069350db2fb213fe8feeec@www.novabbs.org>
References: <v0s17o$2okf4$2@dont-email.me> <glff3j9i1f0h52r2vvpk2psek0gglvr769@4ax.com> <v19fk8$2asct$4@dont-email.me> <d8vh3j58d33knij1httll93mhrgp16dvnn@4ax.com> <v1ciuc$33u73$7@dont-email.me> <1okl3jhhga73kpqs8q88glc3imdo7oua9c@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="419953"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="65wTazMNTleAJDh/pRqmKE7ADni/0wesT78+pyiDW8A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$JZ/m3o/7A9tQki7IMqKc3uAA9p0M80BY5MucCQ23m0XMbzTOEb6mu
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8
Bytes: 2393
Lines: 34

John Savard wrote:

> On Tue, 7 May 2024 06:49:48 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>>On Mon, 06 May 2024 09:56:03 -0600, John Savard wrote:
>>
>>> But we no longer have this problem.
>>
>>But the other reasons for going little-endian still exist.

> And what other reasons might those be?

> Yes, going little-endian made things simpler in computers with short
> word lengths, since the most common operations started from the least
> significant end.

> But to do things in a big-endian way in such computers didn't require
> trying to do addition backwards; you just had to jump ahead by the
> length of the number, and then move backwards from the least
> significant part. Often, though, even a trifling expense to do so
> didn't make sense.

> But when decimal and binary are both used in the same machine, then
> big-endian is almost unavoidable 

Carry from digit to digit is the same direction in binary and decimal.
This argues sameness not Big-Endian.

>                                  - especially when the same
> architecture is to be used in a wide range of implementations, some
> big, and some small. Then, compatibility forces the use of a small
> number of extra gates here and there.

> John Savard