Re: 2.5.28 and partitions

Alexander Viro
2002-08-01T21:05:43Z

On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Thunder from the hill wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > More powerful?
>
> Well, compared to ASCII: it's unlikely that you meet a j letter or a \033
> in the size string.

Huh??? That's a new meaning of "powerful"... If you mean "more compact"
I would certainly agree (base-10 instead of base-256), but if _that_ becomes
a problem with partition tables... IIRC, OP proposed 4096 bytes for table.

Again, if somebody really can't check if array of characters is a valid
representation of integer or can't implement conversion of known valid
one to its value... What the devil are you doing here?