this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59566 readers
3407 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Okay, so why can't we just not use exponentially growing values? Like 96 bit (64 + 36). I'd the something intrinsic about the size increases that they HAVE to be exponential? Why not linear scaling? 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, etc.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

We can, but it's awkward to do so. By having everything work with powers of 2 you don't need to have everything the same size, but can still pack things in memory efficiently.

If your registers were 48bits long, you can use it to store 6 bytes, or 3 short ints, but only one int with 16-bits going unused. If they are powers of two in size, you can always fit smaller things in them with no wasted space.

[–] asmoranomar@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

A better example is to explain the chaos of having to go to the grocery store and pick up some hot dogs and buns. You know the pain.

load more comments (2 replies)