Talk:NTFS: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Content added Content deleted
(→Field sizes: new section) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
I pause a bit when looking at the perpetuation of "unsigned short, 2 byte". It's itching me to change this shebang into "proper" types (i.e., uint16_t). However, I have positively <tt>no</tt> idea if "byte" should be signed or not...?!? {suppressing maniacal laughter} -- [[User:Solar|Solar]] 01:55, 28 February 2012 (CST) |
I pause a bit when looking at the perpetuation of "unsigned short, 2 byte". It's itching me to change this shebang into "proper" types (i.e., uint16_t). However, I have positively <tt>no</tt> idea if "byte" should be signed or not...?!? {suppressing maniacal laughter} -- [[User:Solar|Solar]] 01:55, 28 February 2012 (CST) |
||
:Never mind. I feel better now. -- [[User:Solar|Solar]] 02:02, 28 February 2012 (CST) |
|||
Latest revision as of 08:02, 28 February 2012
"For the sake of performance and compatibility with some (especially Japanese) machines, NTFS allows sectors of other sizes." What's so different about Japanese machines? Same hardware, right? --MessiahAndrw 19:09, 11 January 2007 (CST)
Field sizes
I pause a bit when looking at the perpetuation of "unsigned short, 2 byte". It's itching me to change this shebang into "proper" types (i.e., uint16_t). However, I have positively no idea if "byte" should be signed or not...?!? {suppressing maniacal laughter} -- Solar 01:55, 28 February 2012 (CST)
- Never mind. I feel better now. -- Solar 02:02, 28 February 2012 (CST)