Also, the way we write numbers is little endian when writing in Arabic; we just forgot to reverse the digits when we borrowed the notation.
Little endian is more logical unless you also number your bits with MSB as bit 0. On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Aaron Denney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2008-05-12, Andrew Coppin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> (Stupid little-endian nonsense... mutter mutter...) > > I used to be a big-endian advocate, on the principle that it doesn't > really matter, and it was standard network byte order. Now I'm > convinced that little endian is the way to go, as bit number n should > have value 2^n, byte number n should have value 256^n, and so forth. > > Yes, in human to human communication there is value in having the most > significant bit first. Not really true for computer-to-computer > communication. > > -- > Aaron Denney > -><- > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
