Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch > #116526 > unrolled thread
| Started by | quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-05-19 20:14 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-05-30 19:03 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 582 — 32 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.arch
Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-19 20:14 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-20 00:03 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-20 00:34 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-20 01:35 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-20 02:09 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-20 02:26 +0000
Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-20 05:38 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-05-20 08:10 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-20 08:36 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-05-20 10:37 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-20 11:04 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-05-20 17:01 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-20 17:30 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-20 15:03 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-20 18:07 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-20 19:03 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-05-20 21:45 +0200
Re: Byte order and BCD scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-21 14:36 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-20 22:50 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-21 00:37 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 02:18 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-21 06:29 +0000
Re: ancient virtual memory, Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-21 15:41 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-20 15:28 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-20 15:42 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-20 17:25 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-21 11:52 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-05-20 21:33 +0200
Re: Byte order and BCD anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-21 10:29 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-21 12:04 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-03 00:41 +0000
Re: Byte order and BCD (was: Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-03 17:13 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived Bernd Linsel <bl1-thispartdoesnotbelonghere@gmx.com> - 2026-05-20 10:42 +0200
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-20 15:32 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-20 17:47 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-01 01:14 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-01 02:20 +0000
2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-01 07:47 +0000
Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-06-01 16:04 +0000
Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-01 18:01 +0000
Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-01 18:26 +0000
Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-02 01:22 +0000
Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-02 01:57 +0000
Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-02 17:04 +0000
Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-01 18:08 +0000
Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-01 18:13 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-01 17:59 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-01 20:00 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-01 21:57 +0000
byte order (was: BCD) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-01 08:36 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2026-06-02 14:00 +0100
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-02 14:54 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-02 16:13 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-02 17:13 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-06-02 18:25 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-02 19:07 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-06-02 11:44 -0700
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-02 19:37 +0000
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2026-06-03 08:29 -0400
Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-02 17:09 +0000
bit order and byte order (was: BCD) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-02 15:59 +0000
Re: bit order and byte order (was: BCD) quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-03 00:37 +0000
Re: bit order and byte order (was: BCD) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-03 17:44 +0000
Re: bit order and byte order (was: BCD) George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-06-03 19:05 -0400
Re: bit order and byte order (was: BCD) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-04 12:45 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-02 22:00 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-03 00:21 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-03 01:03 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-03 01:52 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-06-03 13:54 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-03 15:33 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-03 17:36 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina "Brian G. Lucas" <bagel99@gmail.com> - 2026-06-04 11:53 -0500
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-06-03 19:22 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2026-09-05 22:10 +0100
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-06 09:20 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-06 11:47 +0200
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-06 12:17 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-06 15:24 +0200
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-06 14:41 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-06 19:20 +0200
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-06 23:51 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-07 10:10 +0200
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-07 18:22 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-07 23:24 +0200
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-07 22:00 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-08 11:25 +0200
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-08 16:02 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-08 20:32 +0200
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-08 19:03 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-08 20:59 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-07 02:40 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2026-09-06 19:33 +0100
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-09-07 15:57 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-07 17:00 +0000
Re: endian history, was BCD, was Concertina John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-09-08 13:24 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-05 08:17 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-05 13:52 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-05 15:58 +0200
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-05 14:55 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-05 17:24 +0200
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-05 16:57 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-06 02:06 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-06 07:04 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-06 18:38 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-06 21:50 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-08 02:33 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-08 03:46 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-08 17:31 +0000
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-08 20:13 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-09 00:22 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-09 01:10 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-09 01:33 +0000
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 11:06 +0200
Re: endian history Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-08 23:57 -0400
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-06 23:57 +0000
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-06 17:31 -0700
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-06 21:46 -0700
Re: endian history Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-07 13:57 +0800
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-07 15:23 -0700
OT writing direction Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-07 20:15 -0700
Re: OT writing direction Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-08 03:44 +0000
Re: OT writing direction Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-08 17:23 +0000
Re: OT writing direction Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-15 07:49 -0700
Re: OT writing direction Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-15 10:09 -0700
Re: OT writing direction Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-20 07:14 -0700
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-08 17:16 +0000
Re: endian history George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-09-09 20:22 -0400
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-10 01:25 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-10 12:09 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-15 09:19 -0700
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-07 02:35 +0000
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-07 18:14 +0000
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-07 05:05 +0000
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-07 10:32 +0200
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-08 02:36 +0000
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-07 20:21 -0700
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-08 11:32 +0200
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-08 08:31 -0700
Re: endian history Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2026-09-17 10:23 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-07 15:25 -0700
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-06 13:57 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 12:41 -0500
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-06 21:53 +0000
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-07 00:12 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 23:34 -0500
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-08 10:29 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-07 13:56 +0200
Re: endian history Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-07 23:54 +0300
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-08 05:07 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-08 21:14 +0200
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-05 21:16 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-06 01:55 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-06 02:09 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-06 18:28 +0000
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-06 23:54 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-07 02:44 +0000
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-06 15:39 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-06 07:07 +0000
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-06 14:00 +0000
Re: endian history antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-07 20:24 +0000
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-07 16:58 -0700
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-08 02:47 +0000
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-07 20:23 -0700
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-08 03:49 +0000
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-08 16:00 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-08 02:45 +0000
Re: endian history John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-09-08 08:38 +0000
Re: endian history quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-09-09 01:12 +0000
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-08 10:56 +0000
Re: endian history John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-09-08 13:34 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-08 21:23 +0200
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-09 08:04 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-09 23:21 +0200
Base64 ISA (was: endian history) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-14 12:39 -0400
Re: Base64 ISA Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-15 11:26 +0200
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-08 19:30 +0000
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-09 08:22 +0000
Re: endian history Paul Clayton <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 14:55 -0400
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-14 10:29 -0700
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-15 11:32 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-15 08:53 -0700
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-14 17:32 +0000
Re: endian history Paul Clayton <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2026-09-23 21:09 -0400
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-28 15:09 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-14 23:29 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-15 12:49 +0200
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-15 13:01 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-15 16:51 +0200
Re: endian history antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-16 04:41 +0000
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-16 05:53 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-16 07:52 +0000
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-16 07:29 -0700
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-16 15:49 +0000
Re: endian history Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-09-16 10:48 +0200
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-16 16:21 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-18 00:38 -0700
Re: endian history Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-18 17:29 +0300
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-18 16:48 +0200
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-18 16:47 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-18 15:36 -0700
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-22 19:51 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-23 08:28 -0700
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-23 18:01 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-23 10:47 -0700
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-23 18:41 +0000
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-23 13:15 -0700
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-24 15:09 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-25 02:47 -0700
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-24 17:00 +0000
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-24 18:35 +0000
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-25 03:19 -0700
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-26 07:41 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-27 02:48 +0000
Re: endian history Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2026-09-26 23:49 -0400
Re: endian history Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2026-09-27 12:06 +0300
Re: endian history Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2026-09-27 06:14 -0400
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-27 23:57 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-28 14:33 +0200
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-28 10:38 +0200
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-28 08:50 +0000
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-28 11:23 +0200
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-28 22:50 +0000
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-29 06:11 +0000
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-27 17:47 +0000
Re: endian history John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-09-27 18:21 +0000
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-28 15:13 +0000
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-28 13:05 -0700
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-27 16:56 +0200
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-27 20:01 -0700
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-28 06:14 +0000
Re: arithmetic and endian history John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-09-28 14:08 +0000
Re: arithmetic and endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-28 16:54 +0000
Re: arithmetic and endian history John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-09-28 21:46 +0000
Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-09-29 08:01 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-29 14:26 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-29 17:21 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-29 17:28 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-09-29 20:16 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 09:00 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 09:30 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-01 06:49 -0700
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 15:05 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-01 16:04 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-02 01:30 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-01 19:27 -0700
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-02 02:45 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-02 09:53 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-02 19:10 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-03 17:18 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-03 19:54 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-03 20:49 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-03 22:05 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-04 08:09 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-04 15:14 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-04 18:29 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-06 08:29 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-06 03:20 -0700
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-06 17:24 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-12 01:46 -0700
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-12 17:37 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-13 21:57 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-14 07:50 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-14 23:08 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-03 19:55 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-04 06:50 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-04 15:11 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-04 19:38 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-06 07:30 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-06 18:07 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-06 21:17 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-10-06 23:30 +0200
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-07 10:16 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-07 19:53 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-03 23:49 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-04 01:04 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-04 07:47 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-04 18:02 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-11-02 09:45 -0800
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-11-02 10:12 -0800
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-02 18:43 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-02 20:00 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-11-02 20:28 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-03 01:34 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-11-03 08:35 +0100
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-11-02 20:25 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-11-05 23:36 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-06 03:22 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-06 06:24 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-11-06 12:08 +0100
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-06 15:08 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-11-06 20:50 +0100
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-11-06 16:50 +0100
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-06 19:22 +0000
carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-07 07:41 +0000
Re: carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-07 12:09 +0000
Re: carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-07 16:19 +0000
Re: carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-07 18:20 +0000
6502 vs Z80 (was: carry-in) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-07 18:35 +0000
Re: carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-07 22:38 +0000
Re: carry-in antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-08 18:52 +0000
Re: carry-in Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-11-07 10:17 -0800
Re: carry-in in history John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-07 19:00 +0000
Re: carry-in Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-07 22:37 +0000
Re: carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-07 18:44 +0000
Re: carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-07 22:33 +0000
Re: carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-11-08 02:55 -0500
Re: carry-in Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2026-11-08 07:50 -0500
Re: carry-in (was: two's complement and Flags) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-11-09 02:09 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-06 15:28 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-07 02:36 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-11-07 13:52 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-11-06 10:51 -0800
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-02 19:14 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-11-02 20:37 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-03 01:36 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-03 15:09 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-03 06:59 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-04 03:01 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 03:36 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 02:39 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-04 18:06 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 18:20 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-04 21:53 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-11-04 23:08 +0100
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-11-05 08:14 -0800
Re: bad floating point, two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-05 17:26 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-06 08:28 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-04 07:57 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-04 08:14 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-04 09:49 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-04 11:22 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-02 10:01 +0000
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-02 21:19 -0700
Re: two's complement and Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-03 19:40 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-02 05:45 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-02 07:54 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-02 19:07 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-02 20:33 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-01 09:17 -0700
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 16:45 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-01 18:42 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) moi <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2026-10-03 02:30 +0100
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-03 17:43 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) moi <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2026-10-04 23:44 +0100
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-01 07:45 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-01 07:51 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-02 01:31 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-02 02:29 +0000
Re: Flags (Re: arithmetic and endian history) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-02 02:46 +0000
Re: endian history Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-09-28 08:45 -0700
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-29 03:15 +0000
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-28 15:19 +0000
Re: endian history Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-28 14:37 -0400
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-29 22:47 +0000
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-30 08:39 +0200
Re: endian history aph@littlepinkcloud.invalid - 2026-09-30 08:52 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-30 22:26 +0000
Re: endian history aph@littlepinkcloud.invalid - 2026-10-01 10:44 +0000
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-01 21:53 +0000
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-10-02 11:11 +0200
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-02 16:17 -0500
Re: endian history aph@littlepinkcloud.invalid - 2026-10-02 14:25 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-02 16:46 -0500
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-03 02:43 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-03 00:54 -0500
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-03 06:15 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-03 18:51 -0500
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-04 02:35 +0000
Re: endian history Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2026-10-03 10:25 -0400
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-03 16:59 -0500
Re: endian history George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-10-03 15:04 -0400
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-02 21:53 +0000
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 07:34 +0000
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-01 07:00 -0700
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 15:20 +0000
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-01 09:15 -0700
Re: endian history Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-01 19:23 +0300
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-02 21:31 -0700
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-03 10:25 +0000
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 16:36 +0000
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-01 18:38 +0000
Re: endian history George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-10-01 15:17 -0400
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 21:20 +0000
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-01 19:55 +0000
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-10-02 11:21 +0200
Re: endian history Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-02 12:47 +0300
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-10-02 12:57 +0200
Re: endian history Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-02 14:44 +0300
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-10-02 15:28 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-03 05:29 -0700
Re: endian history EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2026-10-01 13:12 -0400
Re: endian history anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-01 17:41 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-01 18:07 -0500
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-02 02:44 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-01 22:06 -0500
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-02 18:05 +0000
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-02 18:00 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-02 13:51 -0500
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-03 14:14 +0000
Re: endian history EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2026-10-04 14:19 -0400
Re: endian history EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2026-10-04 13:59 -0400
Re: endian history aph@littlepinkcloud.invalid - 2026-10-02 15:18 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-02 14:57 -0500
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-03 02:30 +0000
Re: endian history BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-10-03 05:26 -0500
Re: endian history Andy Valencia <vandys@vsta.org> - 2026-10-05 15:53 -0700
Re: endian history Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-06 08:18 +0000
Re: endian history George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-10-06 13:40 -0400
Re: endian history Andy Valencia <vandys@vsta.org> - 2026-10-06 10:49 -0700
Re: endian history Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-10-07 08:54 -0400
Re: endian history Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2026-10-08 18:33 +0000
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-03 04:44 -0700
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-22 18:16 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-22 20:27 +0200
Re: endian history Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-22 16:55 -0700
Re: endian history Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-09-16 16:17 +0000
Re: endian history scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-08 16:01 +0000
Re: endian history Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-09-08 21:17 +0200
Re: endian history MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-09-08 20:15 +0000
Re: endian history David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 11:08 +0200
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-20 18:13 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-20 07:21 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 00:06 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 07:03 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 13:42 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-21 18:32 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 22:21 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-22 07:35 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-22 15:48 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-22 21:22 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-23 09:28 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-23 17:01 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-23 18:37 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2026-05-23 14:15 -0400
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-23 20:01 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-23 16:19 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-23 16:38 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-23 08:36 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-23 16:46 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-23 19:33 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-23 20:03 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-23 20:09 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-23 22:15 +0000
Re: base+displacement, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-24 01:43 +0000
Re: base+displacement, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-24 03:10 +0000
Re: base+displacement, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-24 17:06 +0000
Re: base+displacement, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 13:57 +0000
Re: base+displacement, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-24 15:12 +0000
Re: base+displacement, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 16:44 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 13:30 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-05-24 15:24 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 16:39 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-26 15:13 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 13:32 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 13:49 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 14:14 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-24 09:32 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 17:16 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-24 17:32 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 21:39 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-24 22:07 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-24 15:22 -0700
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-25 10:23 +0200
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-25 14:28 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-25 17:18 +0200
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-25 16:43 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 19:20 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-25 20:32 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 22:51 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-25 20:32 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 23:00 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-26 08:27 +0200
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-05-26 22:09 +0200
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-26 20:54 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-05-27 10:59 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-27 18:19 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-06-01 14:51 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-02 06:19 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-02 07:47 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-06-02 17:50 +0200
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-02 19:10 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-03 00:55 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-06-03 10:42 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-03 18:36 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-06-04 23:46 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-06-05 08:36 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-06-07 15:05 -0700
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-08 01:19 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-06-08 09:25 +0300
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-06-08 11:45 +0200
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-06-08 17:44 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-11 15:14 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-06-11 13:43 -0400
Re: public domain, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-13 03:01 +0000
Re: public domain, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-06-13 05:49 -0400
Re: public domain, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-13 10:52 +0000
Re: public domain, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-06-13 14:20 +0000
Re: public domain, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-06-13 15:07 +0000
Re: public domain, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-06-13 17:25 +0000
Re: public domain, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-06-15 16:32 +0000
Re: public domain, condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-06-14 19:14 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-08 17:11 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-08 06:05 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-06-08 07:30 -0700
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-08 15:19 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-06-08 22:51 +0300
Free software (was: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-08 16:18 +0000
Re: Free software Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-06-08 10:40 -0700
Re: Free software (was: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-06-08 22:43 +0300
Re: Free software (was: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-09 17:24 +0000
Re: Free software Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-06-09 21:15 +0200
Re: Free software Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-06-09 16:29 -0700
Re: Free software (was: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-06-10 06:01 +0000
Re: Free software Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-06-08 18:03 -0400
Re: Free software David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-09 10:06 +0200
Re: Free software Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-06-11 15:21 -0400
Re: Free software David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-12 13:02 +0200
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-06-08 09:18 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-03 21:24 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-06-05 15:07 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-06-06 08:57 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-07 16:42 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-06-06 01:37 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-06-06 07:57 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-06-12 01:57 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-26 08:18 +0200
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-06-12 01:04 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-05-25 15:27 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 16:49 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-25 20:34 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-25 20:02 -0500
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-26 18:02 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-26 14:28 -0500
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-25 16:34 -0500
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 23:05 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-05-26 15:29 -0400
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-26 19:13 -0500
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-25 20:26 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 22:49 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-05-26 05:39 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-05-25 20:32 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 22:59 +0000
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-27 15:24 -0500
Re: condition bits, Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-24 17:30 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-22 15:48 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 22:14 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 23:46 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-22 02:20 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-05-22 07:22 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 02:33 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 06:12 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 13:13 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 13:22 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-21 18:26 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-21 23:44 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-25 01:04 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-25 01:29 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 16:45 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-25 20:45 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-25 23:03 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-30 04:02 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-30 15:47 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-30 19:15 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-05-31 11:05 -0700
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-31 18:40 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-01 19:56 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-01 23:40 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-02 06:20 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-04 04:06 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-04 04:44 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-01 01:40 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-06-01 05:36 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-06-01 18:10 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived Paul Clayton <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2026-05-31 18:38 -0400
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-02 01:52 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-31 01:22 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-31 12:05 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-31 02:57 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> - 2026-05-30 04:06 +0000
Re: Concertina IV Has Arrived MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-30 19:03 +0000
Page 3 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 30 Next page →
| From | John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 18:26 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) |
| Message-ID | <10vkiti$2dij$1@gal.iecc.com> |
| In reply to | #116777 |
According to Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>: >|Sign representations. For the fixed-point arithmetic system, which is >|binary,the two's complement representation for negative numbers was >|selected.The well-known virtues of this system are the unique >|representation of zero and the absence of recomplementation. >What is "recomplementation"? To do sign magnitude arithmetic, you basically do it in one's complement: bit flip negative operands to make them one's complement, do the arithmetic, then bit flip the result if it's negative. That last bit flip is recomplementation. Straight one's complement doesn't have the recomplementation but does have end around carry if there's a carry out of the high bit, and shares with sign-magnitude the question of how you handle +0 and -0 which are different bit patterns but mathemetically equal. -- Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 01:22 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) |
| Message-ID | <1780363357-5857@newsgrouper.org> |
| In reply to | #116779 |
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> posted: > According to Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>: > >|Sign representations. For the fixed-point arithmetic system, which is > >|binary,the two's complement representation for negative numbers was > >|selected.The well-known virtues of this system are the unique > >|representation of zero and the absence of recomplementation. > > >What is "recomplementation"? > > To do sign magnitude arithmetic, you basically do it in one's > complement: bit flip negative operands to make them one's complement, > do the arithmetic, then bit flip the result if it's negative. That > last bit flip is recomplementation. In microarchitecture, you can make the registers 2^(3+n)+1 bits long. Then simply record that the mantissa is complemented (or not) when used as an operand. We do this all the time in microarchitecture to save gates/time/... depending on the implementation technology constraints. > Straight one's complement doesn't have the recomplementation but does > have end around carry if there's a carry out of the high bit, and > shares with sign-magnitude the question of how you handle +0 and -0 > which are different bit patterns but mathemetically equal. > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 01:57 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) |
| Message-ID | <10vlda6$rcr$1@gal.iecc.com> |
| In reply to | #116787 |
According to MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid>: >> >What is "recomplementation"? >> >> To do sign magnitude arithmetic, you basically do it in one's >> complement: bit flip negative operands to make them one's complement, >> do the arithmetic, then bit flip the result if it's negative. That >> last bit flip is recomplementation. > >In microarchitecture, you can make the registers 2^(3+n)+1 bits long. >Then simply record that the mantissa is complemented (or not) when >used as an operand. We do this all the time in microarchitecture to >save gates/time/... depending on the implementation technology >constraints. You can do that now, not so much when building computers out of vacuum tubes in the 1950s. Also, that works OK for registers, but at some point you need to store values in memory at which point I'd think you'd need to do the recomplementing. -- Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 17:04 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) |
| Message-ID | <1780419895-5857@newsgrouper.org> |
| In reply to | #116791 |
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> posted: > According to MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid>: > >> >What is "recomplementation"? > >> > >> To do sign magnitude arithmetic, you basically do it in one's > >> complement: bit flip negative operands to make them one's complement, > >> do the arithmetic, then bit flip the result if it's negative. That > >> last bit flip is recomplementation. > > > >In microarchitecture, you can make the registers 2^(3+n)+1 bits long. > >Then simply record that the mantissa is complemented (or not) when > >used as an operand. We do this all the time in microarchitecture to > >save gates/time/... depending on the implementation technology > >constraints. > > You can do that now, not so much when building computers out of vacuum > tubes in the 1950s. > > Also, that works OK for registers, but at some point you need to > store values in memory at which point I'd think you'd need to do > the recomplementing. Sure, but there is plenty of time to re-complement when storing the value. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 18:08 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) |
| Message-ID | <10vkhr6$2dcbl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116767 |
On Mon, 01 Jun 2026 07:47:42 +0000, Anton Ertl wrote: > This all indicates that byte-ordering decisions worked like in our > student group. The "right" choice seemed so obvious to everyone that we > did not communicate about it nor document it nor document the reasons > for it, and different contributors took different "right" > choices. As has been argued many times, byte-ordering is completely arbitrary, and so either choice is just as good. Given that widespread belief, that kind of behavior is not surprising. Some will think that of course a computer should be little-endian, because arithmetic is faster and simpler that way (if you're doing any multi-word arithmetic). Some will think that of course a computer should be big-endian, because that's just the natural way we write numbers, and anything else would be hopelessly confusing. As I've pointed out, though, there is *one* particular case where there actually is a genuine difference between big-endian and little-endian. If, like the System/360, your computer performs BCD arithmetic and not just binary arithmetic, and if, unlike the System/360, you did your BCD arithmetic in the same registers you use for binary arithmetic... Then, because binary arithmetic is done in the same registers as BCD arithmetic, they should both have the same endianness. And because BCD numbers are directly related to character strings representing numbers - just take the last four bits of each digit character - they ought to have the same endianness. And character strings that represent numbers _are_ big-endian. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 18:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: 2s-complement and byte order (was: BCD) |
| Message-ID | <10vki4e$26n6$1@gal.iecc.com> |
| In reply to | #116767 |
According to Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>: >John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> writes: >>I presume you are aware that the 704 and successors did indexing by two's >>complement subtraction, which is not sign-magnitude. > >Looking at the 704 manual ><https://ia802904.us.archive.org/12/items/bitsavers_ibm7042466_32932660/24-6661-2_704_Manual_1955_text.pdf>, >In any case, I don't think that the IBM 704 manual documents >2s-complement representation of negative numbers for any purpose. The documentation was a bit sparse, but see item 7 on page 17. The manual for the 7090 which had a superset of the 704's instruction set is more complete. See "Complement Arithmetic" on page 10 where it says Effective addresses are always formed in the computer by the addition of the 2's complement of the contents of the index register. https://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/7090/22-6528-4_7090Manual.pdf >So why did the S/360 architects go for 2s-complement? > >One speculation ... We don't have to guess, because they told us in the Amdahl et al article in 1964 in the IBMSJ. Sign representations. For the fixed-point arithmetic system, which is binary, the two’s complement representa- tion for negative numbers was selected. The well-known virtues of this system are the unique representation of zero and the absence of recomplementation. These substantial advantages are augmented by several properties especially useful in address arithmetic, particularly in the large models, where address arithmetic has its own hard- ware. With two’s complement notation, this indexing hardware requires no true/complement gates and thus works faster. In the smaller, serial models, the fact that high-order bits of address arithmetic can be elided with- out changing the low-order bits also permits a gain in speed. The same truncation property simplifies double- precision calculations. Furthermore, for table calculation, rounding or truncation to an integer changes all variables in the same direction, thus giving a more acceptable distribution than does an absolute-value-plus-sign repre- sentation. They go on to explain why decimal numbers are still sign magnitude, mostly becaue it made rounding easier, and float because it made normalizing easier. >>Nor did the people designing the extended multiplier, but they got it >>mostly conssitent in the Vax. > >This all indicates that byte-ordering decisions worked like in our >student group. The "right" choice seemed so obvious to everyone that >we did not communicate about it nor document it nor document the >reasons for it, and different contributors took different "right" >choices. That would seem to be the case. Sometimes things are obscure at the time and obvious in retrospect, sometimes the converse. -- Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 17:59 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <10vkha0$2d8j9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116765 |
On Mon, 01 Jun 2026 02:20:36 +0000, John Levine wrote: > As I may have said once or twice before, we have plenty of guesses, but > since there is no documentation, the guesses are a waste of time. I understand that you would like to have actual documentation. But it doesn't appear to exist. But I don't think my "guesses" are wild. I'm familiar with the other computers that existed in those years, with the milieu in which the System/360 and the PDP-11 existed. > I presume you are aware that the 704 and successors did indexing by > two's complement subtraction, which is not sign-magnitude. There is no > documentation for that either, and I have looked quite hard. Pretty > please, do not guess unless you can cite sources. I admit that the fact that one subtracts the index on an IBM 704 seems very weird to me. Since the IBM 704 was made out of vacuum tubes, saving them, instead of mere discrete transistors, let alone transistors on a microchip with a billion of them, was probably more important. My guess that sign-magnitude arithmetic was regarded as more prestigious, until IBM outgrew that notion with the 360, does have a source, although not an IBM source. A 24-bit computer was advertised as having sign-magnitude integer arithmetic, unlike cheaper machines which either used one's complement integer arithmetic, or, even worse, two's complement integer arithmetic. I think it was the DDP-24, but offhand I'm not completely sure. To guess - or to attempt to derive intelligence from the available information - one might think that IBM considered indexing to be less important or less visible than ordinary integer arithmetic per se. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 20:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <10vkodj$cc7$1@gal.iecc.com> |
| In reply to | #116774 |
According to quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid>: >I admit that the fact that one subtracts the index on an IBM 704 seems >very weird to me. Since the IBM 704 was made out of vacuum tubes, saving >them, instead of mere discrete transistors, let alone transistors on a >microchip with a billion of them, was probably more important. We can guess that someone thought that counting down indexes was important but they turned out to be wrong. Fortran stored arrays in reverse order to make indexing easier. >My guess that sign-magnitude arithmetic was regarded as more prestigious, >until IBM outgrew that notion with the 360, does have a source, although >not an IBM source. My equally uninformed guess is that their tab machines and their commerical computers were decimal sign magnitude, so binary sign magnitude was a short step away. It evidently took a while to realize that while the two's complement negative represntation seemed less intuitive, the logic was a lot simpler. > >A 24-bit computer was advertised as having sign-magnitude integer >arithmetic, unlike cheaper machines which either used one's complement >integer arithmetic, or, even worse, two's complement integer arithmetic. > >I think it was the DDP-24, but offhand I'm not completely sure. > >To guess - or to attempt to derive intelligence from the available >information - one might think that IBM considered indexing to be less >important or less visible than ordinary integer arithmetic per se. > >John Savard -- Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 21:57 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <10vkv81$2hdh6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116781 |
On Mon, 01 Jun 2026 20:00:51 +0000, John Levine wrote: > My equally uninformed guess is that their tab machines and their > commerical computers were decimal sign magnitude, so binary sign > magnitude was a short step away. It evidently took a while to realize > that while the two's complement negative represntation seemed less > intuitive, the logic was a lot simpler. I agree with that. Remember, IBM made tab machines long before they got into computers, and commercial computers, not scientific ones, were their core business later. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 08:36 +0000 |
| Subject | byte order (was: BCD) |
| Message-ID | <2026Jun1.103622@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #116763 |
quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> writes: >But they got the brilliant idea - that more pedestrian >designers would never even considered for a second, or even thought of as >possible - of numbering the bytes in a word backwards too, so as to attain >consistency. The designers of the DataPoint 2200 did that, too, in their instruction encoding, for no technical reason that I am aware of. And the Datapoint 2200 came out within months of the PDP-11, so it is unlikely that they took inspiration from the PDP-11 in this decision. When you introduce byte addressing, you have to take the byte ordering decision. Some designers decide for big-endian, and some for little-endian, and the decision is mostly arbitrary. And, as John Levine writes, the designers of the S/360 and the PDP-11 did not document their reasons for that. For the 6502, the decision is not arbitrary when implementing the addressing modes "ABS,X", "ABS,Y" and "(IND),Y". So for that they decided to go for little-endian to simplify the implementation. Its predecessor, the 6800, does not have any operations, where 16-bit numbers coming from memory are added to something else (at least I did not find such operations), and therefore the decision could be made arbitrarily, and they decided for big-endian. But I think that the 6809 and the 68000 have addressing modes where the big-endian nature complicates the implementation. I looked at how this turned out for the offspring of the Datapoint 2200: For the Z80, I did not find any instruction where the little-endian byte order provided an advantage: when a 16-bit value is accessed in memory, it is used directly instead of being added or somesuch. For the 8088, in theory little-endian might provide an advantage when it comes to addressing modes such as disp16[BX], but AFAIK in practice the 8088 was internally mostly an 8086, with a 16-bit adder, so it loaded the whole 16-bit number anyway before doing the full 16-bit add (am I wrong?). Likewise for the 386SX. - anton -- 'Anyone trying for "industrial quality" ISA should avoid undefined behavior.' Mitch Alsup, <c17fcd89-f024-40e7-a594-88a85ac10d20o@googlegroups.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 14:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <memo.20260602140023.15192M@jgd.cix.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #116556 |
In article <10uks4f$1dqo$1@gal.iecc.com>, johnl@taugh.com (John Levine) wrote: > Having looked into this in some detail, both when IBM used > bigendian order on S/360 and DEC used little-endian on the > PDP-11, neither documented the reasons for the byte order > choice at all. Not even a litle bit. Brooks and Blaauw, two of the S/360 architects, consider the subject in their much later book _Computer Architecture_, on p. 99: "The more logical convention, the Big Endian, considers the whole storage space as one steam of bits. Bits, bytes and words are numbered from left to right, following the convention of writing in Western culture." That explains why IBM mainframes number the most significant bit as zero, the opposite way around to all the platforms I've worked on, which number the least significant bit as zero. I've always find the latter convention helpful for doing hex arithmetic in my head or on paper. I _think_ big-endian SPARC, MIPS and POWER all regard the least significant bit as bit zero, but I can no longer easily check that, John
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 14:54 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <10vmqqv$3064o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116798 |
On Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:00:00 +0100, John Dallman wrote: > Brooks and Blaauw, two of the S/360 architects, consider the subject in > their much later book _Computer Architecture_, on p. 99: > > "The more logical convention, the Big Endian, considers the whole > storage space as one steam of bits. Bits, bytes and words are numbered > from left to right, following the convention of writing in Western > culture." On the other hand, Arabic is written from right to left, and yet the Arabs also write numbers with the most significant digit on the left. Hence, little-endian would seem more logical to them for the same reason. Since this is, therefore, a cultural matter, and not something universal, like the laws of physics or mathematics, we can't tell what a man from Mars would prefer. So, while they can call it "the more logical convention", this isn't something everyone would agree with. The famous article on the subject, "On Holy Wars and a Plea for Peace", by Danny Cohen from 1981 thus termed it as being much less important which standard was chosen than for everyone to choose the same one for compatibility, but he wasn't shy about expressing his personal preference for little-endian, referring to those who practiced big-endian as "outlaws". The case for big-endian is... It makes computers easier to understand for most people in Western societies. It makes core dumps easier to read. Multi-precision compare is faster. The case for little-endian is... People don't need to poke around in core dumps or even program in assembler very much these days. We have compilers. Multi-precision add and subtract is faster, and it's much more common than compare. At least, those are the usual arguments, and from that set of arguments, it does seem like there's little difference and it's just a personal preference. But, as I've noted, I've finally come up with a more compelling justification for big-endian. It still assumes that, if you're processing text data, that text data will be from a society that writes from left to right. Think of text records that include words and numbers in character format. Like 00134700 John Smith 00250000 Richard Roe and so on. The numerical portion has the most significant digit on the left, the alphabetic portion has the first character on the left. Thus, these characters will be stored in memory at succeeding addresses from left to right; the most significant digit is stored at the lower address. So numbers as text strings are stored in big-endian order. That means that it's simplest to convert a text number to a packed decimal number that's in the same order. And an ALU that performs binary arithmetic can be modified to also perform decimal arithmetic by changing when carries take place out of each group of four bits. If that's done, binary and decimal numbers ought to have the same endianness, so that one doesn't need two load and store instructions for the accumulator or the registers. I know some computers, regardless of endianness, number the least significant bit as one instead of zero. Either way, this convention is considered to make sense for wiring a 12-bit DAC to a 16-bit data bus, since now each number corresponds to the same power of two no matter how wide your bus is. Of course, one can argue for considering fixed-point numbers as fractions in [-1,1), but that is needed far less often than using them as integers. A few computers were designed this way; it meant that integers had to be represented with a wasted bit, or that a shift was usually needed after a multiply, so it did not get popular. The IBM 360 made bit numbering consistent not just to make reading the manuals easier, but out of habit - since their most recent previous computer with a 64-bit word was the STRETCH (or 7030)... which had the ability to do bit-addressing as a prominent feature. There, consistency actually mattered. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 16:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <IiDTR.8449$S8Pc.724@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #116799 |
quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> writes: >The case for big-endian is... > <snip> >It makes core dumps easier to read. Actually the program that analyzes the core dump can handle endedness without the programmer even being aware of it. It's been more than half a century since programmers looked at raw memory dumps.....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 17:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <1780420420-5857@newsgrouper.org> |
| In reply to | #116799 |
quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> posted: > On Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:00:00 +0100, John Dallman wrote: > > > Brooks and Blaauw, two of the S/360 architects, consider the subject in > > their much later book _Computer Architecture_, on p. 99: > > > > "The more logical convention, the Big Endian, considers the whole > > storage space as one steam of bits. Bits, bytes and words are numbered > > from left to right, following the convention of writing in Western > > culture." > > On the other hand, Arabic is written from right to left, and yet the Arabs > also write numbers with the most significant digit on the left. Hence, > little-endian would seem more logical to them for the same reason. Chinese and Japanese is written top to bottom ... > Since this is, therefore, a cultural matter, and not something universal, > like the laws of physics or mathematics, we can't tell what a man from > Mars would prefer. Middle endian!! Start in the middle and then one step left followed by one step write--more or less like PDP-11 FP. > So, while they can call it "the more logical convention", this isn't > something everyone would agree with. The famous article on the subject, > "On Holy Wars and a Plea for Peace", by Danny Cohen from 1981 thus termed > it as being much less important which standard was chosen than for > everyone to choose the same one for compatibility, but he wasn't shy about > expressing his personal preference for little-endian, referring to those > who practiced big-endian as "outlaws". > > The case for big-endian is... > > It makes computers easier to understand for most people in Western > societies. Just core dumps--they can be read without dumping hex on one side and characters on the other. > It makes core dumps easier to read. > Multi-precision compare is faster. Not up to 256-bits. > The case for little-endian is... It won. > > John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 18:25 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <10vn768$34cr5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116804 |
MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> schrieb: > > quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> posted: > >> On Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:00:00 +0100, John Dallman wrote: >> >> > Brooks and Blaauw, two of the S/360 architects, consider the subject in >> > their much later book _Computer Architecture_, on p. 99: >> > >> > "The more logical convention, the Big Endian, considers the whole >> > storage space as one steam of bits. Bits, bytes and words are numbered >> > from left to right, following the convention of writing in Western >> > culture." >> >> On the other hand, Arabic is written from right to left, and yet the Arabs >> also write numbers with the most significant digit on the left. Hence, >> little-endian would seem more logical to them for the same reason. > > Chinese and Japanese is written top to bottom ... In classical times, yes, but modern texts are written left to right. > >> Since this is, therefore, a cultural matter, and not something universal, >> like the laws of physics or mathematics, we can't tell what a man from >> Mars would prefer. > > Middle endian!! Start in the middle and then one step left followed by > one step write--more or less like PDP-11 FP. Very Turing machine-like. -- This USENET posting was made without artificial intelligence, artificial impertinence, artificial arrogance, artificial stupidity, artificial flavorings or artificial colorants.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | quadi <quadibloc@ca.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 19:07 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <10vn9lq$3594s$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116806 |
On Tue, 02 Jun 2026 18:25:12 +0000, Thomas Koenig wrote: > MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> schrieb: >> Chinese and Japanese is written top to bottom ... > In classical times, yes, but modern texts are written left to right. In Taiwan and Hong Kong, books written top to bottom, and then right to left, and bound like books written right to left, were still being printed in the 1960s. As far as endianness is concerned, however, the Chinese wrote numbers with the most significant digit on the top, so for purposes of this discussion, Chinese was big-endian even traditionally. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 11:44 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <10vn8b0$34shp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116804 |
On 6/2/2026 10:13 AM, MitchAlsup wrote: > >> Since this is, therefore, a cultural matter, and not something universal, >> like the laws of physics or mathematics, we can't tell what a man from >> Mars would prefer. > > Middle endian!! Start in the middle and then one step left followed by > one step write--more or less like PDP-11 FP. But then you have the "discussion" with those who want to start with a step to the right, followed by one to the left! :-). And that doesn't even address (pun intended), the issue of when you have an even number of bits/bytes/words, do you start with the one to the right of the "middle" or the left. :-) -- - Stephen Fuld (e-mail address disguised to prevent spam)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 19:37 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <1780429037-5857@newsgrouper.org> |
| In reply to | #116808 |
Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> posted: > On 6/2/2026 10:13 AM, MitchAlsup wrote: > > > > >> Since this is, therefore, a cultural matter, and not something universal, > >> like the laws of physics or mathematics, we can't tell what a man from > >> Mars would prefer. > > > > Middle endian!! Start in the middle and then one step left followed by > > one step write--more or less like PDP-11 FP. > > But then you have the "discussion" with those who want to start with a > step to the right, followed by one to the left! :-). And that doesn't > even address (pun intended), the issue of when you have an even number > of bits/bytes/words, do you start with the one to the right of the > "middle" or the left. :-) You could do random endian where a LSFR based on the address sequence determines MEL or MER. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 08:29 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <J6VTR.2$TZ1.1@fx40.iad> |
| In reply to | #116804 |
On 2026-Jun-02 13:13, MitchAlsup wrote: > > Middle endian!! Start in the middle and then one step left followed by > one step write--more or less like PDP-11 FP. We're doing the time warp... again!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 17:09 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: BCD, was Concertina IV Has Arrived |
| Message-ID | <1780420166-5857@newsgrouper.org> |
| In reply to | #116798 |
jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) posted:
> In article <10uks4f$1dqo$1@gal.iecc.com>, johnl@taugh.com (John Levine)
> wrote:
>
> > Having looked into this in some detail, both when IBM used
> > bigendian order on S/360 and DEC used little-endian on the
> > PDP-11, neither documented the reasons for the byte order
> > choice at all. Not even a litle bit.
>
> Brooks and Blaauw, two of the S/360 architects, consider the subject in
> their much later book _Computer Architecture_, on p. 99:
>
> "The more logical convention, the Big Endian, considers the whole
> storage space as one steam of bits. Bits, bytes and words are
> numbered from left to right, following the convention of writing
> in Western culture."
>
> That explains why IBM mainframes number the most significant bit as zero,
> the opposite way around to all the platforms I've worked on, which number
> the least significant bit as zero.
>
> I've always find the latter convention helpful for doing hex arithmetic
> in my head or on paper. I _think_ big-endian SPARC, MIPS and POWER all
> regard the least significant bit as bit zero, but I can no longer easily
> check that,
Do you want to isolate the register bit as::
bit = ((register) >> (register_bits - bit) ) & 1;
or
bit = ((register) >> bit) & 1;
>
> John
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 30 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.arch
csiph-web