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}