in reply to Bit by a Hex String

So this is a string of 26 characters, '0', '1', '2', '3', '4', '5', '6', , '7', '8', '9', 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'; in other words ASCII values 48, 449, 50, 51, ,52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102. Isn't that somewhat inefficient, to use 8-bit characters to store hex values?

You could use BigInt; You could use a set of scalars to store N/billion & N%billion ....; You could use pack & unpack to store hex digits in 4 bits.

--
TTTATCGGTCGTTATATAGATGTTTGCA

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Bit by a Hex String
by abitkin (Monk) on Aug 29, 2003 at 15:38 UTC
    When you get to the hair edge of creating your own packets to use in simulation of network traffic, using chars to store words is actually standard practice, as it is better than storing the actually binary strings and most shifts (all those %4==0) are easy enough. I just had an odd shift number.

    Your absolutly correct with pack and unpack, but I'll be honest with you, I hate pack and unpack. I have to play with them for way too long usally to get them to do what I want.
    ==
    Kwyjibo. A big, dumb, balding North American ape. With no chin.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom