Return to the archive index

Re: for the TRULY geeky!

From: "Allen S. Firstenberg" <>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 08:00:57 -0600

On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 12:38:45AM +1100, Neale Green wrote:
> Welll, there are still 8 bit processors in use out there, I started in Octal
> through Tandems ( based on HP Minis ), because it's still the addressing
> used in the O/S utilities, but Hex is certainly more common nowadays.

Well, even 8 bit processors aren't well represented with octal.  Octal only
represents 3 bits.  My guess (and its only a guess) is that octal dates from
systems where either 3, 6, or 9 bits were the byte size.  8 bits were not
standardized until the IBM 360.  Octal is also well represented in UNIX
where permissions are represented as sets of three bits, with a few
leftover.

Meanwhile, Hex uses 4 bits, which lets processors with an 8 bit byte
represent things to humans as two hexdigits

Using base 32 "digits" would only represent 5 bits.  64 "digits" would only
represent 6, and so on.  Don't confuse byte size or word size with the
radix. 

Allen

--
Subscription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to 
Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org
please, Please, *PLEASE* don't subscribe through a forward/false domain

+Previous Message in Thread | Next Message in Thread

From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty

Archive created with babymail