Xref: utzoo comp.arch:7742 comp.misc:4587 comp.lang.misc:2431 comp.protocols.misc:433
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!lamaster
From: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.misc,comp.lang.misc,comp.protocols.misc
Subject: Re: "big endian" and "little endian" - first usage for computer
Message-ID: <20264@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: 5 Jan 89 00:33:21 GMT
References: <2766@cbnews.ATT.COM> <10147@well.UUCP> <13045@cup.portal.com>
Reply-To: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Hugh LaMaster)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 22

In article <13045@cup.portal.com> bcase@cup.portal.com (Brian bcase Case) writes:
>Big endian has the significant advantage that, when properly aligned,
>character strings can be compared using the full width of the machine's

>Since it forces inefficiency, little-endian is for CISCs.  :-) :-)

I could be wrong, but I think a fully consistent little-endian machine
(e.g. nsc 32xxx) does not have this disadvantage.

All this was covered about 2 years ago on this group: the conclusion then
was that little-endian had a small advantage on tiny machines (e.g. 8008
class and slower) needing to do BCD arithmetic, big endian machines have
the "advantage" that it is easier to read dumps, and there are no other
significant differences.  VAXes, of course, are not consistent little-
endian or big-endian, but then, we are not supposed to have to read dumps
anymore anyway, remember ?  :-)

-- 
  Hugh LaMaster, m/s 233-9,  UUCP ames!lamaster
  NASA Ames Research Center  ARPA lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov
  Moffett Field, CA 94035     
  Phone:  (415)694-6117