[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bytes vs. octets
At 15 Sep 2004 11:53:58 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Alex Shinn <foof@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > I've given it a lot of thought and have decided to stick to *-byte in
> > the names as there is simply no advantage in changing to octet. In
> > this day and age "byte" is universally accepted as being 8 bits and
> > any argument that it could be misinterpreted is simply not
> > realistic.
> What do you mean my "universally accepted", given that you have seen
> it not accepted on this very list?
I have only seen evidence that in those machines for which the
smallest addressable memory unit is not 8 bits they still use "byte"
to refer to 8 bits. This is the modern definition of byte.