From: tkoenig@netcologne.de   
      
   Michael S  schrieb:   
   > On Sun, 12 Oct 2025 10:14:08 -0000 (UTC)   
   > Thomas Koenig  wrote:   
   >   
   >> Anton Ertl  schrieb:   
   >> > Thomas Koenig  writes:   
   >> >>There is something to be said for at least having a big-endian   
   >> >>system around to test programs:  If people mismatch types, there   
   >> >>is a chance that it will blow up on a big-endian system and work   
   >> >>silently on a little-endian system.   
   >> >   
   >> > If the only thing wrong with the software is that it does not work   
   >> > on big-endian systems, and little-endian has won, is there really   
   >> > anything wrong with the software?   
   >>   
   >> A type mismatch?  I think so.   
   >>   
   >> >>And of course, this is all due to an architecture which is arguably   
   >> >>the most influential of all times (or at least has the highest   
   >> >>ratio of influence to recognition level, but that by a _huge_   
   >> >>margin): The Datapoint 2200.   
   >> >   
   >> > Another widely-used architecture today inherited its byte order from   
   >> > the 6502.   
   >>   
   >> Which one?   
   >   
   > Arm.   
      
   That does not have many architectural features from the 6502 :-)   
      
   >It was designed as CPU for successor of 6502-based BBC Micro.   
   >   
   > But does 6502 really have "byte order" in hardware? Or just "soft"   
   > conventions of BBC BASIC interpreter?   
      
   Yes, the 6502 is little-endian, which you can see in its instruction   
   formats and the way the pointers in the zero page were stored.   
      
   --   
   This USENET posting was made without artificial intelligence,   
   artificial impertinence, artificial arrogance, artificial stupidity,   
   artificial flavorings or artificial colorants.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)