On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:24:57AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > So if the table is basicaly storing values that enumerate something, why are
> > we using hex to represent them? Hex gives the impression they're an opaque
> > sort of thing, like code, bitmasks or magic numbers.
>
> Your guess is
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:50:18AM +0100, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:54:55AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > > Could you be more specific about what the table contents mean?
> > BTW, let me point out again that this table including comment is a
> > verbatim copy from the Li
On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 15:47 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:54:55AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> > > Michel may know better, but I think it's the order of characters.
> > > Those with the lower order go first in the sorted binary tree. Those
> > > with the same or
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:54:55AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > >> +static unsigned char caseorder[256] = {
> > >> +
> > >> 0x00,0x01,0x02,0x03,0x04,0x05,0x06,0x07,0x08,0x09,0x0A,0x0B,0x0C,0x0D,0x0E,0x0F,
> > >
> > > Could you be more specific about what the table contents mean?
>
> BTW
On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 13:06 +0100, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:50:18AM +0100, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> > > BTW, let me point out again that this table including comment is a
> > > verbatim copy from the Linux kernel fs/hfs/string.c . Sorry if I didn't
> > > make this clear enoug
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:50:18AM +0100, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> > BTW, let me point out again that this table including comment is a
> > verbatim copy from the Linux kernel fs/hfs/string.c . Sorry if I didn't
> > make this clear enough in my original post.
> Ugh, welcome our GPLv3 party. v2 member
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:54:55AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > Could you be more specific about what the table contents mean?
> BTW, let me point out again that this table including comment is a
> verbatim copy from the Linux kernel fs/hfs/string.c . Sorry if I didn't
> make this clear enough
On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 15:19 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 07, 2009 at 11:38:36PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > Quoting Robert Millan :
> >
> > >On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 08:19:41AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > >>+/*
> > >>+ * unsigned char caseorder[]
> > >>+ *
> > >>+ * Defines the
On Sat, 2009-02-07 at 23:38 -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Quoting Robert Millan :
>
> > On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 08:19:41AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >> +/*
> >> + * unsigned char caseorder[]
> >> + *
> >> + * Defines the lexical ordering of characters on the Macintosh
> >> + *
> >> + * Composit
On Sat, Feb 07, 2009 at 11:38:36PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Quoting Robert Millan :
>
> >On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 08:19:41AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >>+/*
> >>+ * unsigned char caseorder[]
> >>+ *
> >>+ * Defines the lexical ordering of characters on the Macintosh
> >>+ *
> >>+ * Composit
Quoting Robert Millan :
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 08:19:41AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
+/*
+ * unsigned char caseorder[]
+ *
+ * Defines the lexical ordering of characters on the Macintosh
+ *
+ * Composition of the 'casefold' and 'order' tables from ARDI's code
+ * with the entry for 0x20 chan
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 08:19:41AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> +/*
> + * unsigned char caseorder[]
> + *
> + * Defines the lexical ordering of characters on the Macintosh
> + *
> + * Composition of the 'casefold' and 'order' tables from ARDI's code
> + * with the entry for 0x20 changed to match t
12 matches
Mail list logo
