Ha ha!!! (woops) Thanks Ilia. That makes total sense now. :-) So I gave myself a bunch of grief trying to rationalize it.
I have been accustomed to environments where only base-10 notation is unqualified, and the others would have something such as 0x or 16r as a prefix. Thanks again, and regards. Gregory B. On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 3:03 PM Ilia Mirkin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 5:06 PM Gregory Bourassa > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi folks, > > > > Has anyone noticed that the example message which begins the document is > erroneous. At one point (under the Message Structure heading) the authors > claim that: > > > > 96 01 = 1001 0110 0000 0001 > > > > which it cannot, since 1001 0110 in radix 10 is 150. > > But it's 96 in radix 16. You always use hex when talking about file / > bit encodings, never base 10... > > Cheers, > > -ilia > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/CANEdqAVQjQRz_hrFOjfrE9khUr94G_Og4dm7Ns4ybjx0rk%3DK_w%40mail.gmail.com.
