clipka wrote:
> Invisible schrieb:
> 
>> Think about it. If you store the textural representation of a number 
>> in ASCII, the most significant digit comes first. But if Intel has 
>> their way, the most significant byte comes... last? And if you have to 
>> split a large number into several machine words, unless you number 
>> those words backwards, you get monstrosities such as
>>
>>   04 03 02 01 08 07 06 05 0C 0B 0A 09
> 
> That only happens if, for some obscure reason, you try to interpret a 
> /character sequence/ as an integer value. Which it isn't.
> 
> Directly interpreting ASCII representations of numbers is made 
> problematic in multiple ways anyway:

I'm not talking about storing numbers as ASCII. I'm talking about 
storing a number such as 0x0102030405060708090A0C0B. Any sane person 
would store 0x01, followed by 0x02, followed by 0x03, and so on. But 
Intel and a few like them have decided to instead muddle up the ordering.

Post a reply to this message