On Friday, Nov 29, 2002, at 16:41 Europe/Amsterdam, Martin v. L=F6wis=20 wrote: >> Another option was to add "k1", "k2", "k4" and "k8", to mean >> uint8, uint16, uint32 and uint64. "k1" and "k2" would be synonyms >> for "B" and "H", but this would make the k-format-family consistent. > > Since this is the proposal that MAL just came up with also, it seems = to > be a manifest idea (unless it was also MAL who proposed this the last > time around, in which case it might only be manifest to him). If that > meets all requirements, go for it - I'm just not sure how I would use > for plain int, since I don't know its size in advance. I grabbed it from the old discussion, so there's a good chance MAL came=20= up with it at that time. But Guido mumbled somthing about "k1"=3D=3D"B" and=20 "k2"=3D=3D"H" and that being overkill, and then the discussion stopped. Hence my=20 question: is k1/k2/k4/k8 what it's going to be? -- - Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com> =20 http://www.cwi.nl/~jack - - If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma=20 Goldman -
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4