Revision as of 02:59, 5 March 2021 edit 2607:f2c0:9504:7f00:70a6:ab88:acff:78a3 (talk) →History: Better refs for C and Ritchie. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 13:58, 15 May 2021 edit undo 2001:44b8:4146:600:2e1:50ff:fe00:256 (talk) →History: tense consistency, encyclopedic facts are not posited at some distant time in the past, with other later facts yet to occur as if written by a time traveler, they are all either in the past, or 'at time of writing' considered present tense or future tense. I think this tense was used to soften the obvious conflict of opinions. If people's opinions collide, this is just a dry fact, softening such facts represents PoV, antithetical to encyclopedic factuality & wiki neutrality Next edit →
Line 12: This had some influence on CPU [[instruction set]] design. Some CPUs in the 1970s and 1980s, such as the [[Zilog Z80]] and the [[Digital Equipment Corporation\|DEC]] [[VAX]], had dedicated instructions for handling length-prefixed strings. However, as the null-terminated string gained traction, CPU designers began to take it into account, as seen for example in IBM's decision to add the "Logical String Assist" instructions to the [[IBM ES/9000 family\|ES/9000]] 520 in 1992. [[FreeBSD]] developer [[Poul-Henning Kamp]], writing in ''[[ACM Queue]]'', ~~would later refer~~referred to the victory of null-terminated strings over a 2-byte (not one-byte) length as "the most expensive one-byte mistake" ever.<ref>{{citation \|last=Kamp \|first=Poul-Henning \|date=25 July 2011 \|title=The Most Expensive One-byte Mistake \|journal=ACM Queue \|volume=9 \|number=7 \|issn=1542-7730 \|access-date=2 August 2011 \|url=http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2010365 }}</ref> == Limitations ==

Null-terminated string: Difference between revisions