Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!gatech!hubcap!beede From: beede@hubcap.UUCP (Mike Beede) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: Size of SysV "block" (really: byte != 8 bits) Message-ID: <326@hubcap.UUCP> Date: Tue, 21-Jul-87 19:57:22 EDT Article-I.D.: hubcap.326 Posted: Tue Jul 21 19:57:22 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 23-Jul-87 05:34:56 EDT References: <857@bsu-cs.UUCP> Organization: Clemson University, Clemson, SC Lines: 32 in article <857@bsu-cs.UUCP>, dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) says: > > [ much deleted ] > > Since we are now in the 1980s going on to the 1990s, I think it's about > time we streamlined our terminlogy to reflect the times. > > A byte is therefore exactly 8 bits. No more and no less. Opinions to > the contrary belong in the 1960s. Let them lie there and die there. > > [ more deleted ] I suppose that you've allowed for all possible increases in character set size, possibly including fonts encoded on a per-character basis? And any advances in technology, too? While we're at it, let's standardize on whatever machine you like, with all the ``modern'' features, and get rid of all these other nasty architectures with their own ideosyncratic features. Oh well, all right :-> / 2. Seriously--different machines serve different purposes, and so are designed differently. That is why it is foolish to freeze some design parameter arbitrarily. I don't see that there is, for instance, a clear argument against 36 bit words and 9 bit bytes as opposed to 32 bit words and 8 bit bytes, especially if your application works well with 9 bit quantities. -- Mike Beede Computer Science Dept. UUCP: . . . !gatech!hubcap!beede Clemson University INET: beede@hubcap.clemson.edu Clemson SC 29631-1906 YOUR DIME: (803)656-{2845,3444}