On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 02:44:37PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> Supporting '0x20M' looks odd, particularly since we have a 'B' suffix
> that is ambiguous for bytes, as well as a less-frequently-used 'E'
> suffix for extremely large exibytes. In practice, people using hex
> inputs are specifying
On 2/11/21 9:44 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> Supporting '0x20M' looks odd, particularly since we have a 'B' suffix
> that is ambiguous for bytes, as well as a less-frequently-used 'E'
> suffix for extremely large exibytes. In practice, people using hex
> inputs are specifying values in bytes (and
Supporting '0x20M' looks odd, particularly since we have a 'B' suffix
that is ambiguous for bytes, as well as a less-frequently-used 'E'
suffix for extremely large exibytes. In practice, people using hex
inputs are specifying values in bytes (and would have written
0x200, or possibly relied
