OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

sarif message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: Leading 0x on hash?



I made an editorial change in the Provisional Draft to specify that a hash.value whose format is hexadecimal contains no prefix or suffix. I also took the opportunity to say that it is case-insensitive ("123ab" is the same as "123AB").


The Change Draft is here:






-----Original Message-----

From: Michael Fanning <Michael.Fanning@microsoft.com>

Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 8:34 AM

To: James A. Kupsch <kupsch@cs.wisc.edu>; Larry Golding (Comcast) <larrygolding@comcast.net>; sarif@lists.oasis-open.org

Subject: RE: Leading 0x on hash?


I agree. The 0x prefix is mostly to help differentiate literals in languages/contexts that provide for differing base (10, 16, 8) and not a convention associated with hash function outputs.


-----Original Message-----

From: James A. Kupsch <kupsch@cs.wisc.edu>

Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 7:55 AM

To: Larry Golding (Comcast) <larrygolding@comcast.net>; sarif@lists.oasis-open.org; Michael Fanning <Michael.Fanning@microsoft.com>

Subject: Re: Leading 0x on hash?


I do not think that they should have a leading "0x".  I have never seen a hash value with a leading "0x".  It is a string value and the description describes the meaning for hash functions that produce integer values.





On 04/20/2018 06:42 PM, Larry Golding (Comcast) wrote:

> Should hex hash digests have a leading "0x"?


> The spec doesn't say. The samples in the spec do /not/ have the

> leading 0x, and at the moment, the SARIF SDK does not emit the leading 0x either.


> Larry


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]