Re:Updating the Git protocol for SHA-256
by mkl on Saturday June 20, 2020 @07:51AM
(#23583407)
I think you've kind of missed the point, which is that a larger base would mean shorter hash strings.
Using a small base like 16 means the hashes are very long, and awkward to use in full. Using a larger base will make the hash shorter when it's in text form. A text representation of a 256 bit hash in base 16 is 64 characters long, but in base 46 it is only 47 characters long. Using the whole alphabet in lower and upper case, and the digits, would produce base 62, where a 256 bit hash would be 43 digits long.
Still a bit big and unwieldy IMHO, so sticking with hexadecimal seems sensible given its other advantages.
Using a small base like 16 means the hashes are very long, and awkward to use in full. Using a larger base will make the hash shorter when it's in text form. A text representation of a 256 bit hash in base 16 is 64 characters long, but in base 46 it is only 47 characters long. Using the whole alphabet in lower and upper case, and the digits, would produce base 62, where a 256 bit hash would be 43 digits long.
Still a bit big and unwieldy IMHO, so sticking with hexadecimal seems sensible given its other advantages.