> > It might be better not to consider "bit" to be a > > type at all, and come up with another way of indicating > > that the size is in bits. Perhaps > > > > 'i4' # 4-byte signed int > > 'i4b' # 4-bit signed int > > 'u4' # 4-byte unsigned int > > 'u4b' # 4-bit unsigned int > > > > I like this. Very nice. I think that's the right way to look at it. I remark that 'ib4' and 'ub4' make for marginally easier parsing and less danger of ambiguity. -- g
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