Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:22:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ND2qX-0005z5-QO for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:22:50 -0800 Received: from ol.freeshell.org ([192.94.73.20] helo=sdf.lonestar.org) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ND2qR-0005yh-Tp for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:22:49 -0800 Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (IDENT:jwodder@iceland.freeshell.org [192.94.73.5]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nAOLMaVh008271 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:22:36 GMT Received: (from jwodder@localhost) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.3/8.12.8/Submit) id nAOLMYiQ029009 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:22:34 GMT Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:22:34 +0000 From: Minimiscience To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Hexadecimal numbers Message-ID: <20091124212215.GA13289@sdf.lonestar.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org References: <4b674e5b0911241210h66002baem43a8c62bb34c3d65@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4b674e5b0911241210h66002baem43a8c62bb34c3d65@mail.gmail.com> Organization: SDF Public Access UNIX System User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) X-archive-position: 2581 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: minimiscience@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 1366 de'i li 24 pi'e 11 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Cal Stepanian .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra. > According to this part of Lojban For Beginners, > http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/lojbanbrochure/lessons/less5days.html > hexadecimal digits haven't been assigned rafsi. Is this a temporary problem, > or is this what the designers intended? .skamyxatra Neither (unless your definition of "temporary" includes "until snowmen are running GNU HURD in Hell"). As far as I can tell, they simply ran out of {rafsi} for the hexadecimal digits, which were comparatively low on the "likely to be used in {lujvo}" scale. The direct {rafsi} equivalents of the hex digits are already assigned to "{darlu}," "{fepni}," "{gacri}," "{djacu}," "{preti}," and "{vajni}," respectively, and the available {rafsi} that can be formed by changing the last letters of the digits are scarce and not intuitively associated with them. > I want to use base sixteen eventually for most everything, because it would > be so much simpler to convert to and from binary that way You don't need {rafsi} for that; a multi-digit number is formed by simply listing the {cmavo} for the digits. The {rafsi} are only needed when making {lujvo} out of words, and I can't think of any instances in which you would want to do that with hexadecimal digits. mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun. -- lo paroi cumki cu rere'u cumki