Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdonald
From: mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: binary data files
Message-ID: <225800166@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 1 May 89 14:08:00 GMT
References: <10946@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Lines: 21
Nf-ID: #R:bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU:10946:uxe.cso.uiuc.edu:225800166:000:777
Nf-From: uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdonald    May  1 09:08:00 1989


>.... Believe me, ascii is better:
>    ...
>Bad things [WRT ascii data file]:
>
>1. Files take a bit longer to read in

More than a bit longer. I see no reason not to standardize on a 
standard binary format and use that for data interchange: 
8 bit bytes, two's complement.  On more-than-eight-bit byte
machines, pad with zeroes. Your choice of endianness. For example,
TeX produces a well-defines .dvi file as output, and Metafont
produces standard .gf files, all of which are binary. I have
no difficulty copying these between DEC-20's, IBM-PCs and VAX's
(which are the same for this), and big-endian RISC machines.
Dec-20s have 36 bit words.

Screwing around with endianness etc., repacking bytes, etc., is
a lot faster than ASCIIfication, especially in C.

Doug McDonald