Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Justin Patrin wrote: > Except that noone knows what a kibibyte is except us few on this > thread. I'd never heard of such a thing until now. A standard that > isn't used isn't a standard. It is generally understood that kilobyte > means 1024 bytes. The hard drive manufacturers lie and say that 1000 > bytes is a kilobyte but as far as I know all other uses of kilobyte > mean 1024 bytes. I've seen KiB and MiB in the wild for at least a year now, including a lecture during a conference, and one coworker is using them regularly. Is not that rare. > I vote to use kilobyte to mean 1024 bytes, as it is now. I could go either way. But can't fail to notice that kilo does come from the greek word meaning "thousand" and bytes and bits are the only exception to the rule. nicolás -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHFCapmjsZS9ZBxv8RAq/NAJ9+5hn+vkDhPuQmtbiEfHRbf2fSAACcCNeD fMAMIbr4TJGxD81nHJKU+BA= =jn/s -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
On 10/15/07, Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As far as I'm concerned, the standard you're citing only serves to > > enhance confusion when the rule is perfectly simple and was understood > > by everyone until the hard drive marketeers put their foot in it. 1024 > > bytes should be called a kilobyte, and 1000 bytes should not be called > > anything. No exceptions. > > Unfortunately, the hard drive markateers have effectively muddied the > waters. Using the "new" definitions for -ibi prefixes clarifies things > once again. I'd be for "standardization" on -ibi notation, since it > really has little impact on monotone as a whole anyway. Entirely > cosmetic change. > Except that noone knows what a kibibyte is except us few on this thread. I'd never heard of such a thing until now. A standard that isn't used isn't a standard. It is generally understood that kilobyte means 1024 bytes. The hard drive manufacturers lie and say that 1000 bytes is a kilobyte but as far as I know all other uses of kilobyte mean 1024 bytes. I vote to use kilobyte to mean 1024 bytes, as it is now. -- Justin Patrin ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
[Monotone-devel] Re: could we get away with requiring perl during the build, for botan's sake?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] > I vote[0] for the new Botan, perl dependency and all. What does "vote[0]" mean? ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] could we get away with requiring perl during the build, for botan's sake?
At 2007-10-15T13:09:46-0700, Zack Weinberg wrote: > I noticed yesterday while updating AUTHORS that our copy of Botan is way > out of date. The newer version has some nice things in it - for example, > tuned assembly versions of SHA1 - but the catch is, you configure the > library for the target processor etc. with a Perl script. I am not > wanting to rewrite the thing in Autoconf. Would requiring a working Perl > installation (it doesn't look like it needs anything beyond a basic 5.x > perl) be too much of a hindrance? Sounds good to me. It won't be a problem for the MinGW builds. It's slightly more hassle for the Visual Studio builds, but not a big deal. Worst case (and probably not necessary), we can keep generated copies of the files in the tree under visualc/ like we do with a few other files. Cheers, -mjg -- Matthew Gregan |/ /|[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As far as I'm concerned, the standard you're citing only serves to > enhance confusion when the rule is perfectly simple and was understood > by everyone until the hard drive marketeers put their foot in it. 1024 > bytes should be called a kilobyte, and 1000 bytes should not be called > anything. No exceptions. Unfortunately, the hard drive markateers have effectively muddied the waters. Using the "new" definitions for -ibi prefixes clarifies things once again. I'd be for "standardization" on -ibi notation, since it really has little impact on monotone as a whole anyway. Entirely cosmetic change. Chad ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] could we get away with requiring perl during the build, for botan's sake?
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 01:09:46PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote: > I noticed yesterday while updating AUTHORS that our copy of Botan is > way out of date. The newer version has some nice things in it - for > example, tuned assembly versions of SHA1 - but the catch is, you > configure the library for the target processor etc. with a Perl > script. I am not wanting to rewrite the thing in Autoconf. Would > requiring a working Perl installation (it doesn't look like it needs > anything beyond a basic 5.x perl) be too much of a hindrance? I vote[0] for the new Botan, perl dependency and all. Cheers, --Jack -- Jack (John) Cummings http://mudshark.org/ PGP fingerprint: F18B 13A3 6D06 D48A 598D 42EA 3D53 BDC8 7917 F802 pgpJHKdjrVg5b.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
[Monotone-devel] could we get away with requiring perl during the build, for botan's sake?
I noticed yesterday while updating AUTHORS that our copy of Botan is way out of date. The newer version has some nice things in it - for example, tuned assembly versions of SHA1 - but the catch is, you configure the library for the target processor etc. with a Perl script. I am not wanting to rewrite the thing in Autoconf. Would requiring a working Perl installation (it doesn't look like it needs anything beyond a basic 5.x perl) be too much of a hindrance? zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
On 10/15/07, Lapo Luchini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nope, I'm not talking about small-and-fluffy anime characters (that > would be chibi, anyway), but about the de-iure-but-not-de-facto (yet :P) > standard to use correct "binary" prefixes also for byte, thus removing > confusion. > > As it goes 1000 bytes is 1 kilobyte (1 kB) > while 1024 bytes should be called 1 kibibyte (1 KiB). As far as I'm concerned, the standard you're citing only serves to enhance confusion when the rule is perfectly simple and was understood by everyone until the hard drive marketeers put their foot in it. 1024 bytes should be called a kilobyte, and 1000 bytes should not be called anything. No exceptions. zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
Richard Levitte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > njs> (Why are we talking about this on monotone-devel?) > > Beats me, I'm just responding to what is said here. Perhaps because Monotone reports byte counts in "k", "M" and "G" when the locale is unset or English? I do note that the Italian locale says "Ki", "Mi" and "Gi". -- Ludovic Brenta. ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
Hi, Nathaniel Smith wrote: (Why are we talking about this on monotone-devel?) I guess because monotone shows a 'k' during netsync, which I'm interpreting as kilobytes. I've no idea whether those are 1000 or 1024 bytes - nor do I really care that much. Other places I've missed? Lapo? Regards Markus ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:00:26 -0700, Nathaniel Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: njs> On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 06:12:17PM +0200, Richard Levitte wrote: njs> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:35:23 +0200, Lapo Luchini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: njs> > njs> > lapo> As it goes 1000 bytes is 1 kilobyte (1 kB) njs> > lapo> while 1024 bytes should be called 1 kibibyte (1 KiB). njs> > njs> > That's what I would call newspeak... njs> njs> That's a strange stance, since kilo has meant 1000 back to at least njs> the mid 19th century: http://www.bipm.org/en/si/history-si/ That's applying a decimal system on a binary system. The choice 1024 is, of course, the closest possible in a binary system that is still humanly comprehensible. The stance is based on the fact that 1000 is a power of 10 and 1024 (decimal) is a power of 2. 1000 (decimal) is in no way a power of 2, and 1000 (binary) is just too ridiculous to talk about... njs> (Why are we talking about this on monotone-devel?) Beats me, I'm just responding to what is said here. Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ "When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
Patrick Georgi wrote: > Lapo Luchini schrieb: > >> would be chibi, anyway), but about the de-iure-but-not-de-facto (yet :P >> >> > As for "yet": IEC 60027-2 (since 1999) > That's what I meant to say: standardized "de iure" since a long time, but used in the wild "de facto" not yet very much... But it wasn't much clear :P -- Lapo Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (OpenPGP & X.509) www.lapo.it (Jabber, ICQ, MSN) ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 06:12:17PM +0200, Richard Levitte wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:35:23 +0200, Lapo > Luchini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > lapo> As it goes 1000 bytes is 1 kilobyte (1 kB) > lapo> while 1024 bytes should be called 1 kibibyte (1 KiB). > > That's what I would call newspeak... That's a strange stance, since kilo has meant 1000 back to at least the mid 19th century: http://www.bipm.org/en/si/history-si/ (Why are we talking about this on monotone-devel?) -- Nathaniel -- "But suppose I am not willing to claim that. For in fact pianos are heavy, and very few persons can carry a piano all by themselves." ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:35:23 +0200, Lapo Luchini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: lapo> As it goes 1000 bytes is 1 kilobyte (1 kB) lapo> while 1024 bytes should be called 1 kibibyte (1 KiB). That's what I would call newspeak... Cheers, Richard -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ "When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] kibi!
Lapo Luchini schrieb: > would be chibi, anyway), but about the de-iure-but-not-de-facto (yet :P > As for "yet": IEC 60027-2 (since 1999) Regards, Patrick Georgi ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
[Monotone-devel] kibi!
Nope, I'm not talking about small-and-fluffy anime characters (that would be chibi, anyway), but about the de-iure-but-not-de-facto (yet :P) standard to use correct "binary" prefixes also for byte, thus removing confusion. As it goes 1000 bytes is 1 kilobyte (1 kB) while 1024 bytes should be called 1 kibibyte (1 KiB). It's true: pretty much nobody uses "kB" correctly already, but is that a good reason not to be unambiguous when we could easily avoid it? :P http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibi#IEC_standard_prefixes Lapo ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
