(Sorry, this welcome is way, way, way overdue. But better now than later)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- How to edit a page
- Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
- If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
Some Barnstars for youEdit
|The Apple Barnstar|
|You deserve it from all your hard work on Apple Inc articles. 2002:43F4:3ABB:1234:E1BD:1018:38D4:483B (talk) 23:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)|
|The iOS Barnstar|
|You deserve it from all your hard working on iOS articles. 2002:43F4:3ABB:1234:E1BD:1018:38D4:483B (talk) 23:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)|
|The Original Barnstar|
|Thanks for the extensive edits on 2 Mar 2019 to History of computing hardware (1960s–present) Tom94022 (talk) 07:20, 3 March 2019 (UTC)|
It appears User:Onzite., User:PastieFace, User:Ritalin12, and User:Rich Coburn are all one and the same. Onzite. admits to being that New Zealand IP here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:X86&diff=prev&oldid=956106133. I have blocked. This person seems to have some sort of axe to grind with the now deceased User:Jeh. Feel free to let me know if another sock pops up in the future. Sro23 (talk) 20:49, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Big- and Little-end of a Computer word and not of an eggEdit
You reverted my revert which reverted A_D_Monroe_III's revert of a contrib of Dscotese.
So I won't revert your double revert.
You say: big and little in the case of an egg and of a multi-octet quantity are two ENDs. But a multi-octet quantity does NOT have two ends. It HAS a start (and an end). And this is IMPORTANT. Because it's not either way:
- Big-endianess STARTS big (high-order) and ends little.
- Little-endianess STARTS little (low-order) and ends big.
(I'm unable to perceive how you would define: A big-endian multi-octet quantity ends at its high-order [your words] byte and a little-endian multi-octet quantity ends at its low-order byte. Isn't this kind of tautological?)
Btw, in almost all computers (do you know of an exception?) a multi-octet quantity is addressed by its start address and not by its end address. And the start address is obviously the “end” under consideration. - Nomen4Omen (talk) 06:29, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Nomen4Omen: "But a multi-octet quantity does NOT have two ends. It has a start and an end." OK, so what defines the "start" and "end" of a multi-octet quantity? Is the start the octet with the low-order bits, or the octet with the numerically lowest address?
- (Note that the document that introduced the terms "big-endian" and "little-endian" refers to two ends of a data word.) Guy Harris (talk) 07:08, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- OK, I thought I talked about “start address” and that this is the one which is the crucial point here. (The start address of a multi-octet entity is the address of the octet with the lowest address and the one by which it is usually pointed to by all pointers and logical references.) Of course, I know that one is able to speak of the start as another (a second?) end. But in our context it is important that this second end is distinguishable from the first one by “numerically lowest address” [as you say] and NOT by “low-order bits” which indeed would help absolutely nothing (tautological as I said above).
- In terms of defining something, Danny Cohen's introduction of Little-Endians and Big-Endians are a nice and funny story, but the choice of the terms “little-endian” and “big-endian” is a mistake. Of course we have: little-endian == low-order-at-some-end and big-endian == high-order-at-some-end. But at which end? It is important to distinguish the two ends by other means (than low- or high-order). And Danny Cohen knows it and says: «which bit should travel FIRST» (here: which == low- or high-ORDER and first == low ADDRESS). Nevertheless, his nice, pretty and really funny allusion to Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels (which maybe brought him on the walk of fame) and his subsequent introduction of the words “little-endian” and “big-endian” destroys the point he is really trying to make — for so many many people. - Nomen4Omen (talk) 08:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Nomen4Omen: In your edit comment, you said "But "end"ianness in place of "start"ianess", which is using the first definition of "end" from this dictionary. In that definition, there's a "start" and an "end". In "endianness", "end" is being used according to the second definition, in which there can be two "end"s (two extreme points); the endianness is a choice of which end will be transmitted first on a network or will have the lower storage address.
- Hopefully this edit by Kbrose will make things clearer. Guy Harris (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)