From: "Paul Gilmartin" <00000014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 2:54 PM
Too much sarcasm. It's analogous to the ASCII-EBCDIC confrontation. I prefer
ASCII, but EBCDIC, with no intrinsic superiority,
It was superior for 80-column punch card input and output,
and for the tabulators that were used to print the input cards and
output cards containing the results.
The internal codings derived naturally from weights associated with
rows on the cards.
Of course, once the card image was stored in memory, the values could
have been converted to ASCII (and the reverse on output)
possibly using a TR instruction. And then the problem of ASCII and EBCDIC
would not still be with us.
has its proponents and is entrenched in its own dusty corner.
I don't expect IBM to abandon it soon.
Likewise, I believe that null terminated strings are an inferior technology,
but they'll long be with us.
Definitely inferior, as Clem Clarke pointed out.
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.