Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #71401

Re: Spurious diagnostic messages

Show all headers | View raw

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:

(snip)
> You assert that binary constants don't provide a capability that
> is fairly easily available othrwise.  I disagree.
 
> The capability they provide is expressing bit patterns clearly.
 
> It could be argued that hexadecimal constants provide the same
> capabiility.  If I see `0x56`, it's obvious to me at a glance that
> the bit pattern is `0b0101_0110` (I'll temporarily assume that we
> have underscores in constants as well).  If I see `0xcd`, it takes
> me a moment to figure out that the bit pattern is `0b1100_1101`.
> That's just me, but I'm sure I'm not the only one.

As long as they are appropriately aligned, I can usually read them
fairly easily. (Not so long ago, I was doing microcode dumps reading
the lights in binary, and writing down hex digits. It takes me just
a little longer to distinguish X'B' and X'D'.)

By properly aligned, I mean that I can't do shifts that aren't
multiples of four in my head.  Reading a hex dump of IEEE floating
point values, and then putting the bits together before and after
the binary point, I have to write them down, then read back the
bits as new hex digits. 

Note the advantage for IBM hexadecimal floating point, where the
hexadecimal point is appropriately aligned in a hex dump.

-- glen

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-26 07:44 -0700
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-26 15:33 -0700
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 19:57 +0100
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-28 20:52 +0100
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-29 11:19 +0000
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-28 22:26 +0000
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-30 13:56 +0100
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 19:22 +0100
          Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-30 19:45 +0100
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 09:02 -0700
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 18:34 +0100
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-05 00:23 -0700
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-04 15:56 -0700
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-04 20:04 -0700
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 09:13 -0700
          Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-09 13:40 -0700
            Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-10 22:26 +0200
              Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-10 13:49 -0700
            Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 07:53 -0700
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-27 17:30 +1300
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 10:26 -0700
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 17:02 +1300
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 10:06 -0700

csiph-web