On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Bakul Shah <bakul+pl...@bitblocks.com> wrote:
> Ok! I don't feel strongly either way. But I hope you do > consider counted bytestrings to represent random memory. > It is cheap to parse and produce and doesn't lose info. bear in mind that 99.9999999% of the time (well, that's an exaggeration!) people do a quick one-off run of this type of tool to see something. Thus, it should be biased to human readability. Counted bytestrings doesn't quite do that. But I can escape the characters that are not printable if you want. \...@through \whatever ron
