Re: [swift-evolution] Why hard-code octet-sized bytes?

> On Jun 19, 2016, at 1:04 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> On Jun 17, 2016, at 1:01 PM, Daryle Walker via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >> When I first looked into Swift, I noticed that the base type was called >> “UInt8” (and “Int8”) and not

Re: [swift-evolution] Why hard-code octet-sized bytes?

> On Jun 17, 2016, at 1:01 PM, Daryle Walker via swift-evolution > wrote: > > When I first looked into Swift, I noticed that the base type was called > “UInt8” (and “Int8”) and not something like “Byte.” I know modern computers > have followed the bog standard

Re: [swift-evolution] Why hard-code octet-sized bytes?

Old old old architectures. We're talking Multics days. ~Robert Widmann 2016/06/17 21:35、David Sweeris via swift-evolution のメッセージ: > IIRC, a bunch of Ye Olde systems used 6-bit bytes. And I think 36-bit ints > were used in a few architectures, but don't quote me on

Re: [swift-evolution] Why hard-code octet-sized bytes?

IIRC, a bunch of Ye Olde systems used 6-bit bytes. And I think 36-bit ints were used in a few architectures, but don't quote me on that. - Dave Sweeris > On Jun 17, 2016, at 22:48, Félix Cloutier via swift-evolution > wrote: > > Out of curiosity, can you name an

Re: [swift-evolution] Why hard-code octet-sized bytes?

Out of curiosity, can you name an architecture that doesn't use 8-bit bytes? Félix > Le 17 juin 2016 à 13:01:33, Daryle Walker via swift-evolution > a écrit : > > When I first looked into Swift, I noticed that the base type was called > “UInt8” (and “Int8”) and not

Re: [swift-evolution] Why hard-code octet-sized bytes?

You raise an interesting point. To explore this further: we could definitely just lower a lot of it to the appropriate integer-width arithmetic in LLVM. I suspect the limitations of the standard library implementation you bring up exist because "nonstandard" types such as these don't show up

Re: [swift-evolution] Why hard-code octet-sized bytes?

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Swift has a type called Int8 that represents numbers from -128 to 127 using 8 bits. I don't see how this "excludes" computers. On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 13:01 Daryle Walker via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > When I first looked into Swift, I

[swift-evolution] Why hard-code octet-sized bytes?

When I first looked into Swift, I noticed that the base type was called “UInt8” (and “Int8”) and not something like “Byte.” I know modern computers have followed the bog standard 8/16/32(/64) architecture for decades, but why hard code it into the language/library? Why should 36-bit