On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Ken Whistler <kenwhistler_at_att.net> wrote:
>
> On 10/6/2016 12:44 PM, Garth Wallace wrote:
>
> Some representatives of the WFCC have proposed alternate arrangements that
> assume there will be a need for bitwise operations to covert between the
> existing chess symbols in the Miscellaneous Symbols block and related
> symbols in the new block. I don't see the need but maybe I'm missing
> something.
>
>
> I don't think you are missing anything. Bitwise operations would certainly
> *not* be needed in a case like this. Small lookup and mapping tables
> would suffice.
>
> --Ken
>
>
Received on Fri Oct 07 2016 - 23:29:48 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Oct 07 2016 - 23:29:49 CDT