On 8/6/07, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I was unaware of SPECS C2X. Mea culpa.
Really, in this context "c2x" is the base-16 and takes 4 times more space and time than base-64. Even the most broken ASCII to EBCDIC translation will not confuse the 64 code points used for base-64. If data is treated like a byte stream, then you may need to encode your record boundaries too. If you're dealing with EBCDIC text then there is probably room to encode the record separator, otherwise something like "addrdw cms" and "deblock cms" may be appropriate (or "pack" and "unpack" as you suggest). > .. but I don't have DIGEST (yet), nor can I count on all of our > customers having it (yet). Does DIGEST provide different sums > for inadvertently concatenated records? If not, "PACK | DIGEST" > is the way to go (if one can count on DIGEST's being available). The "digest" stage can work on a stream of bytes (ignoring record boundaries) or compute a digest per input record. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/
