Re: Ada Connections to this Crypto.

[mrvmurray@gmail.com]

On Monday, 15 December 2014 10:50:45 UTC+2, Austin Obyrne  wrote:
> In cryptography when a data item is called in for encryption the 'coinage'
> i.e. the currency for mutual understanding in the obfuscation scheme is
> a standard enumeration type which happily is the ASCII standard today
> (ignore the extension to the full Latin_1 which my be marked - 'proved'). 

Use standard terminology, please.

Subroutines are "called". Data is "read" (or "written" not) "called".

The standard enumeration type is a byte, also known as an octet, NOT Latin-1
or any other character encoding that you happen to be unable to forget about.
These resemble integers in the range 0..255 and that is all they are.
 
> I repeat we do not have to send copies of our comparator ...

In the case of bytes you don't even have to think about doing this.

> Consider now the case when the entities deliberately eschew this
> mutual standard and opt instead for a user-defined enumeration
> type instead of ASCII that evolves from using sequential_IO ...

You are tantalisingly close to "getting it" here. it is not a user-defined
enumeration type, it is a UNIVERSAL enumeration type.

> There may be exceptions to this like your ZIP file model- since this
> debate is not fully researched ...

This is about as "fully researched" as it gets! You are making a very
basic new-programmer error.

> I don't accept the inevitable trivial curio exceptions ...

Well, nobody agrees with you here, because you are about as wrong as 
it is possible to get. Read the numerous responses you get from the
knowledgeable people you continuously thank for their input.

> I don't think the readers involved are thinking that far ahead.

You think wrong. Read your readers' responses to see what they are thinking,
and stop assuming that you are unassailably correct.

> Thanks for your input.  

... which you ignore and reject.

M
--