Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Come to think of it, if -h implied -g instead, you might have a >> simpler implementation (albeit one with rounding errors and slower >> performance). > > This would break with exabytes.
Why? -g uses floating point, and 1 EB (10**18) can be represented exactly as an IEEE double. An IEEE double can even represent one ZB (10**21) exactly. It does have a rounding error once you get to the YB (10**24) range but like I said, there would be rounding errors. And if you're talking about powers of 1024 not 1000, even one YiB (2**80) can be represented exactly. > My need for this is only to be able to sort output of commands like > du -h. Having -h imply -g would do this, no? _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
