What is wrong with BitArray.CopyTo()?

[ozbear]

Hi,

Having worked with a number of processor architectures, I am yet to come
across an architecture where the numbering of bits is reversed. As Jon has
pointed out, endianness determines byte order, *NOT* bit order.

<snip>

This horse is about dead, but the above statement is simply not
true. Endian-ness applies to both bit /and/ byte ordering.
In the absence of the word /bit/ most people would assume
byte when talking about little/big endian systems, but it
is a term that is applicable at both levels.

You can look, for example, at
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/b/big_endian.html
but the term bit endian has been around for a long time.

Perhaps the best example of this is the Motorola microsprocessors
that have big-endian /byte/ order but little-endian /bit/
order.

Oz

 

[ozbear]

Cheers. Very odd.

Well, there are a lot of them around (and have been for 40
years) :O)

But that's irrelevant to the original question, concerning the
behaviour of BitArray. The behaviour of BitArray when constructed with
an array of bools takes them in order, with the first one being bit 0,
etc.

I was merely refuting your point that bit numbering is
standardised. A /language/ can impose whatever notation it
likes for the "numbering" of the bits within a byte/word/
whatever.

Other than that, we are in violent agreement!

Regards, Oz

 

[Chris Taylor]

Well, that is very very interesting. Thanks for enlightening me on this
point..