Sujet : Re: The joy of FORTRAN
De : c186282 (at) *nospam* nnada.net (c186282)
Groupes : alt.folklore.computers comp.os.linux.miscDate : 28. Feb 2025, 07:39:11
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <APKdnejSf_m8x1z6nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
On 2/26/25 7:22 PM, Rich Alderson wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 15:47:15 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
The idea of defining different-sized bytes is a real plus.
What they meant by "bytes" was really just "bitfields".
Look up the original definition of "byte" in the signal processing literature,
and you'll find that "arbitrary bitfield" is the original meaning, dude.
The restriction of "byte" to "bitfield of a particular size for the manufacturer's
architecture, especially 8 bits" is the odd choice.
8 bits kinda emerged with microprocessors. Likely
reflected what was practical to do on the chip
real-estate plus industry competition. 8008 and then
everything was 8 bits. The popularity of the Z80
kinda cemented it.
…