Hi, On Tue, 8 May 2007, Karl Hasselström wrote: > On 2007-05-08 23:07:04 +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > On Tue, 8 May 2007, Karl Hasselström wrote: > > > > > On 2007-05-08 17:10:47 +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > > > + char *`, but is actually expected to be a pointer to `unsigned > > > > + char[20]`. This variable will contain the big endian version of the > > > > + 40-character hex string representation of the SHA-1. > > > > > > Either it should be "unsigned char[40]" (or possibly 41 with a > > > terminating \0), or else you shouldn't be talking about > > > hexadecimal since it's just a 20-byte big-endian unsigned integer. > > > (A third possibility is that I'm totally confused.) > > > > It is 40 hex-character, but 20 _byte_. If you have any ideas how to > > formulate that better than I did... > > I think this is less confusing: > > This variable will contain the 160-bit SHA-1. > > It avoids talking of hex, since it's not really stored in hex format > any more than any other binary number with a number of bits divisible > by four. And it avoids saying big-endian, which is not relevant anyway > since we don't use hashes as integers. Well, I do not buy into that. First, we _have_ to say that it is big-endian. It was utterly confusing to _me_ that the hash was not little endian, as I expected on an Intel processor. And I'd rather mention the hex representation (what you see in git-log and git-ls-tree). This helps debugging, believe me. Ciao, Dscho
