On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:00:01PM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 14:52:09 -0500 > From: Eitan Adler <[email protected]> > To: [email protected], John-Mark Gurney <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: looking for someone to fix humanize_number (test cases > included) > Message-ID: > <caf6rxgkcodg2ep2pdxjkjcyqzbynre_tpt3cqeygwrtz6ak...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On 25 December 2012 14:46, Clifton Royston <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I correct myself: the function works fine, and there are no bugs I > > could find, though it's clear the man page could emphasize the correct > > usage a bit more. > > Can you submit a diff to the man page as well? I figure if you got > confused at least 10 others got even more confused.
I'd be happy to, and will do so soon. I would like to finish rereading and poking the code a little more first, so I understand and can document how scale actually works and what it's doing without "autoscale" set, which is the actual case which John's tests first brought up. Right now its results for some test cases I'm writing don't make much sense to me, particularly with HN_DIVISOR_1000. So far from find+grep under /usr/src it appears to me that every call to humanize_number() in the code base is correctly passing HN_AUTOSCALE - i.e. the ability to pass a specific scale is unused - which may be why this never came up. -- Clifton -- Clifton Royston -- [email protected] / [email protected] President - I and I Computing * http://www.iandicomputing.com/ Custom programming, network design, systems and network consulting services _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
