Steve Sabram wrote:
> However, 10 is not a multiple of 2 and thus more code
> needed to be written for proper representation.
Since everyone is nitpicking on the details of Steve's nice article,
I'll try to be the first to point out that 10 *is* a multiple of 2. You
meant "10 is not a power of 2".
And, to try to contribute something besides criticism, I'll add that
octal (base 8) was a popular way to represent numbers for a while. It
has the advantage over hex that it uses only normal decimal digits
(0...7) and doesn't need alphabetic characters to stand for digits. I
guess it's main disadvantage is that 8, 16 and 32 bit numbers aren't
represented by an integral number of octal digits, as they are in hex.
Also numbers are usually longer in octal than in hex.
--Mark
