> Van: Paul B. Webster VK2BZC <paulb@midcoast.com.au>
> Aan: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Onderwerp: Re: Inverting binary word
> Datum: woensdag 5 mei 1999 15:10

Hello Paul,

> Caisson wrote:
>
> > Using a pre/postfix that designates the Number-base has my vote.
> > Using the same Number-base thru-out the whole program (except where
> > another representation is called for, like using binary numbers with
> > bit-manipulations)
>
>   Hmmm.  You've contradicted yourself immediately!

Not really.  I just tried to say that You/I/Anyone should not take another
number-base with every instruction, but not make "take one numberbase
thruout the program" a Law.

>   My personal preference is in fact to use number bases according to
> their strengths.  For a calculation which I would perform in decimal
> (e.g., on a calculator), I use decimal specification of the numbers.  I
> might tend to use binary for bitmasks, but it isn't really terribly
> readable, so I generally use hex.  This appears to be what you are
> saying you *actually* do.
>
> > gets another vote.  Not depending on the RADIX setup gets a strong
> > Thumbs-Up.
>
>   As I don't really think in hex by default, decimal seems a good
> default radix.

I'm mostly working in Hex.  A Subroutine (based on my HEX Radix.) would not
work with your program (based on a Dec Radix) ...

> > So, the 0xFF gets my vote (notice the lower-case "x" and uppercased
> > Hex-digits :-) .
>
>   That is the style I generally use for hex.  Only because so many
> people appear addicted to this Intel crap notation.  Motorola convention
> ($ for hex, % for binary) is *immesurably* cleaner, including parsing.

That's an opinion.  I've worked with both (and with versions that post-fix
the number-base), and do not have a real preference ...  Although I would
like a standard convention :-)

>   The point I was *actually* making, is that using the "-1" convention,
> you can ignore the radix! -1 = -0x1 = b'-1' you see.

It's a good one.  But writing the number including it's number-base has my
preference.

>   Also note:  I never mentioned octal ;-)

My god !  I learned to enter machine-code (8080) this way. Geez, I'm
getting Old.

Greetz,
  Rudy Wieser