- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:58:27 +1100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > From looking at the rest of the spec briefly, it looks like we lose some bitwise and shift operators as a result -- is that correct? Yeah, and some of those can be synthesized. <<1 can become *2. The loss doesn't seem particularly bad. The gain (2^22 times more space) seems like a serious upside. That this popular language is driving this decision is the only thing that bothers me. Yes, it's a popular language, but it's probably the only one that doesn't have native 64-bit numbers (yet -- https://tc39.github.io/proposal-bigint/). Would the use of bignums change this calculus?
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2018 06:58:57 UTC