From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-29 11:19:46 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.uchicago.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!portc.blue.aol.com.MISMATCH!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsfeed.skycache.com.MISMATCH!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news-east.rr.com!news-west.rr.com!lsnws01.we.mediaone.net!typhoon.san.rr.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3B8D323E.B40170F3@san.rr.com> From: Darren New Organization: Boxes! X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++ Followup-To: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Subtle Bugs, kudos Ada (was How Ada ...Red Code ...) References: <3B8462C8.5596C089@yahoo.com> <87n14nmbf8.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3B89A809.46083436@yahoo.com> <871ylxpxu6.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3B8AA131.3FCC0E9A@yahoo.com> <87g0ad44ab.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3B8B1130.97FFDD66@yahoo.com> <3B8BD171.32C155D2@yahoo.com> <_SRi7.115023$B37.2552767@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com> <3B8BED46.3DEE945B@yahoo.com> <9f6e2b77.0108290931.35e845b7@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:19:42 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.165.20.229 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com X-Trace: typhoon.san.rr.com 999109182 24.165.20.229 (Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:19:42 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:19:42 PDT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12570 comp.lang.c:77467 comp.lang.c++:86506 Date: 2001-08-29T18:19:42+00:00 List-Id: > BTW, what if a machine were implemented with the LSB on the left and > the MSB on the right? Would A>>1 actually require a _left_ shift (per > the A/2 requirement above)? Err, "left" and "right" don't make any sense when talking about machine implementations. There's no reason to assume that different bits of the same byte are in the same bank of memory chips, let alone where they are on the die. :-) Arabic numbers are written LSB on the right (which is the *first* position in Arabic). This actually makes a lot more sense than having the MSB come first. Followups to comp.lang.c where they belong, thanks. :-) -- Darren New San Diego, CA, USA (PST). Cryptokeys on demand.