weird C behavior

[rbj%icst-cmr at smoke.UUCP]

Bill Crews writes:

	The only reason you got -28672 for BIG instead of nulls is
	because your machine has backwards byte order.

Sorry Bill, *you're* the one that's got backwards byte order. Little
Endian is `correct', even tho bucking historical convention.

My reasoning is this: The original byte ordering was done the obvious
way, Big Endian. If this was so perfect, why would a sane man design
anything Little Endian? For compelling mathematical reasons!
You wouldn't number your bits backwards (within a register) would you?
Admittedly, some people do, but they must not know any better.

I admit this causes some headaches because of our historical biases.
Unfortunately, this means I side with Intel and against Motorola on
this, but it just goes to show a company can't be all right or all wrong.
Like National goofed & called `longs' `doubles' & vice versa!

	(Root Boy) Jim Cottrell		<rbj at cmr>