Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
And the -10s and -20s were the major reason RFCs refer to octets rather than bytes, as they had a rather slippery notion of "byte" (anywhere from 6 to 9 bits, often multiple sizes used *in the same program*).
Not quite correct. Anywhere from 1 to 36 bits, and not spanning a 36-bit word boundary. Essentialy what is now known as a bit field. --Johnny
On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 09:57:34, Johnny Eriksson said:
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
And the -10s and -20s were the major reason RFCs refer to octets rather than bytes, as they had a rather slippery notion of "byte" (anywhere from 6 to 9 bits, often multiple sizes used *in the same program*).
Not quite correct. Anywhere from 1 to 36 bits, and not spanning a 36-bit word boundary. Essentialy what is now known as a bit field.
Right - but in actual programming practice, code tended to distinguish between a "byte" and "N bit wide field of flags or whatever". And bytes as character storage ran from 6 to 9 bits depending on the charset in use.
participants (2)
-
Johnny Eriksson -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu