RetroSearch Browse

Fri Sep 18 02:49:49 CEST 2009 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-September/091872.html

>On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:41:37 am Andrew McNamara wrote:
>> In the olden days, the mask was spelled out in octets (eg
>> 255.255.255.0). But we've moved to a more compact and logical
>> notation where the number of leading significant bits is specified
>> (eg /24).
>
>I hope you're not suggesting the older notation be unsupported? I would 
>expect to be able to use a mask like 255.255.255.192 without having to 
>count bits myself.

No, of course not - I was just explaining the relationship between the
two notations for people who may not have been aware.

-- 
Andrew McNamara, Senior Developer, Object Craft
http://www.object-craft.com.au/

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-September/091872.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 3144 review.