On 5.8.2013 11:10, John Lumley wrote:
> But there is another issue we haven't addressed - the default being
> 'little endian'. Whilst I understand that the common x86 architecture is
> little-endian, I'm more concerned that I very rarely (perhaps never?)
> see little-endian data in my own limited practice - mostly its been
> big-endian. And we write our (hex) numbers big-endian. Can anyone give a
> really compelling important use case that really favours a little-endian
> default?
Indeed, you are right that big-endian as default makes more sense. I
think it was me who proposed little-endian as a default and probably
only reason was that my brain is crippled after years of writing x86 code.
Jirka
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
Professional XML consulting and training services
DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 rep.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Bringing you XML Prague conference http://xmlprague.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 5 August 2013 14:58:49 UTC