Aaron Denney wrote:
On 2008-05-12, Andrew Coppin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(Stupid little-endian nonsense... mutter mutter...)
I used to be a big-endian advocate, on the principle that it doesn't
really matter, and it was standard network byte order. Now I'm
convinced that little endian is the way to go, as bit number n should
have value 2^n, byte number n should have value 256^n, and so forth.
Yes, in human to human communication there is value in having the most
significant bit first. Not really true for computer-to-computer
communication.
It just annoys me that the number 0x12345678 has to be transmuted into
0x78563412 just because Intel says so. Why make everything so complicated?
[Oh GOD I hope I didn't just start a Holy War...]
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
