[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite
From: |
Paul Fox |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite |
Date: |
Wed, 14 May 2014 09:46:33 -0400 |
i've pushed the changes to rename %(units) to %(kilo), and to add a
new %(kibi) function.
if you're running git master, and are using %(units), you'll need
to change it to %(kilo).
the marker line (still) uses %(kilo), which means it disagrees with
the output of mhlist. that's an easy change to mhform.marker,
depending on how others feel.
mhlist still uses 1024-based math, but prints K/M/G. barring a
more complete rewrite to make mhlist's output tuneable, i guess i
should change it to either print Ki/Mi/Gi or use 1000-based math, to
at least be self-consistent. thoughts?
paul
i wrote:
> ralph wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > > it's clearly (to me, at least) not too late to change "units" to
> > > "kilo". kibi can be added separately.
> >
> > Ken said the code used base 2, >> 10, so the shipped files using the new
> > `units' should switch to kibi? Or perhaps there aren't any? (I thought
> > the functions were being added so marker lines could better represent
> > the content so they were being used there.)
>
> summary:
>
> currently (1.6 and previous) the part marker comes from mhlist's
> list_content(). that code computes the size using ">> 10", and prints
> K/M/G/T. it avoids dealing with fractions by printing small numbers
> of megabytes as large numbers of kilobytes, e.g.. "1089K".
>
> when i made the marker controllable, at first the size got dropped
> altogether (since part size wasn't available from mh-format), and then
> when i realized that was a bit of a UI regression, it got added back
> using %(units), which does "/ 1000", and prints K/M/G/T. the default
> mhshow.marker then adds a 'B', resulting in KB/MB/GB/TB. ken and i had
> agreed that it was okay to change the format somewhat (we were
> specifically discussing the "1089K" thing at the time), and since i
> was only implementing one %(units) function, decimal seemed like a
> better choice than binary. %(units) prints at most one digit after a
> decimal point for fractional values.
>
> i'm currently planning on renaming %(units) to %(kilo), and then adding
> a new %(kibi), which will print Ki/Mi/Gi/Ti.
>
> i don't particularly care whether %(kilo) or %(kibi) is used in the
> default marker. if left to me, i'll choose %(kilo).
=----------------------
paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 50.0 degrees)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Paul Fox, 2014/05/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Ken Hornstein, 2014/05/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Paul Fox, 2014/05/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Ken Hornstein, 2014/05/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Paul Fox, 2014/05/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Paul Fox, 2014/05/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Ralph Corderoy, 2014/05/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Paul Fox, 2014/05/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Ralph Corderoy, 2014/05/13
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Paul Fox, 2014/05/13
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite,
Paul Fox <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Ken Hornstein, 2014/05/14
- Re: [Nmh-workers] new marker format broke test suite, Ralph Corderoy, 2014/05/16