[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #54931] bitpack order in big-endian machines
|
From: |
Carnë Draug |
|
Subject: |
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #54931] bitpack order in big-endian machines |
|
Date: |
Sat, 10 Nov 2018 14:31:43 -0500 (EST) |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 |
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #54931 (project octave):
But is this a bug on the implementation? Or is the bug just in the
documentation? The one code sample I used to open the bug report is assuming
one interpretation of the documentation. If my interpretation of the
documentation is incorrect, then there's no bug in the implementation and the
test code is incorrect.
Thing is, documentation says that buts are in order of significance, but then
says that bit 0 is first element, bit 1 is second element. Using an uint32
type and big-endian machine, only one of those is correct.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?54931>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/