/top/
/new/
/best/
/ask/
/show/
/job/
^
slacker news
login
about
←back to thread
C++ proposal: There are exactly 8 bits in a byte
(www.open-std.org)
288 points
Twirrim
| 9 comments |
17 Oct 24 22:21 UTC
|
HN request time: 1.521s
|
source
|
bottom
1.
cyberax
◴[
17 Oct 24 23:27 UTC
]
No.
41874839
[source]
▶
>>41874394 (OP)
#
But think of ternary computers!
replies(1):
>>41874847
#
ID:
GO
2.
dathinab
◴[
17 Oct 24 23:28 UTC
]
No.
41874847
[source]
▶
>>41874839 (TP)
#
Doesn't matter ternary computers just have ternary bits, 8 of them ;)
replies(2):
>>41874880
#
>>41874912
#
3.
AStonesThrow
◴[
17 Oct 24 23:32 UTC
]
No.
41874880
[source]
▶
>>41874847
#
Supposedly, "bit" is short for "binary digit", so we'd need a separate term for "ternary digit", but I don't wanna go there.
replies(2):
>>41875125
#
>>41875189
#
4.
mathgenius
◴[
17 Oct 24 23:35 UTC
]
No.
41874912
[source]
▶
>>41874847
#
Ternary computers have 8 tits to a byte.
replies(1):
>>41875195
#
5.
bryanlarsen
◴[
18 Oct 24 00:10 UTC
]
No.
41875125
{3}
[source]
▶
>>41874880
#
The standard term is "trit" because they didn't want to go there.
6.
epcoa
◴[
18 Oct 24 00:22 UTC
]
No.
41875189
{3}
[source]
▶
>>41874880
#
The prefix is tri-, not ti- so I don’t think there was any concern of going anywhere.
It’s tricycle and tripod, not ticycle.
7.
tbrownaw
◴[
18 Oct 24 00:24 UTC
]
No.
41875195
{3}
[source]
▶
>>41874912
#
Should be either 9 or 27 I'd think.
replies(1):
>>41875221
#
8.
epcoa
◴[
18 Oct 24 00:28 UTC
]
No.
41875221
{4}
[source]
▶
>>41875195
#
Why can’t it be 8?, the fact that it’s a trit doesn’t put any constraint on the byte (tryte ? size). You could actually make it 5 or 6 trits (~9.5 bits) for similar information density. The Setun used 6 trit addressable units.
replies(1):
>>41876513
#
9.
◴[
18 Oct 24 05:07 UTC
]
No.
41876513
{5}
[source]
▶
>>41875221
#
↑