--- In [email protected], "entropyreduction" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "swzoh" <seanzoh@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "swzoh" <seanzoh@> wrote: > > > The length of the byteblock "xString" always return 263. I became > > > curious why it's not 2*2 or 266: > > > > > > 266 = 272 - 1 - 4 - 1 > > > > > > where 1-byte header, 4-byte size as int, 1-byte eos. > > > > > > My conjecture is that the header is not 1-byte, but actually 4-byte. > > > Some kind of Struct Packing arose here, I suppose: > > Yup. Sean has chastised me for using a CHAR in a struct. > > I'll revise at some point. > > But see below. > > binary.length, BTW, probably should be called binary.capacity: > it's always the available space in a byteblock. > > binary.length (the actual number of real bytes in use in a byteblock) > is neither necessary or feasible, IMO. > > -- all the API calls I've run into so far that fill a BYTE array > also return a byte-count, or require a byte-count as an argument: > so the user ASAIK always has a way of knowing how many bytes > have been returned. > > -- Furthermore, how can a byteblock know how many of it's bytes are > "real"? There's no magic terminating null. A byteblock doesn't > know whether it's been passed through an API call that's filled > it, so it has no idea how manh of it's bytes matter. > > The only a byteblock can know how many of its bytes are real is > if the byteblock's tells it: e.g. some service like > binary.set_length. But doesn't seem much point. > > I'll rename binary.length to binary.capacity at some point. > > Also: I wonder if all this messing about with byteblocks read and > written straight to variables is a good idea. > > Should binary instead return and require handles, like unicode? It > would mean you wouldn't have remember to use the name of a variable, > instead of a variable, in calls to binary. And you could use the > handle.service syntax. > > Reactions? >
Alan, swzoh is Sean, AFAIK. :) I already expressed my opinion on this in the mail, which mostly accorded with the view here (:so, binary.from_ascii_string() and binary.from_hex_string() are very exceptional cases). And, treating byteblock as a handle than a mere variable could be a good thing, I wonder. Sean Attention: PowerPro's Web site has moved: http://www.ppro.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/power-pro/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
