On Tuesday 15 November 2011, Jim Meyering wrote: > Paul Eggert wrote: > > On 11/15/11 08:45, Voelker, Bernhard wrote: > >> -KB 1000, K 1024, MB 1000*1000, M 1024*1024, and so on for G, T, > >> P, E, Z, Y.\n\ +KB (1000), K (1024), MB (1000KB), M (1024K), and > >> so on for G, T, P, E, Z, Y.\n\ > > > > That would be fine with me. (I find them equally confusing. :-) > > I'm 60/40 for the use of "*" (i.e., 1000*1000), because with it, > each comma-separated item is self-contained. > > In your replacement, each of MB and M relies on the > just-defined "KB" or "K" notation. Without that context, > they may be misinterpreted.
I also think the multiplier version is a bit easier to read. My preferred one would be something like this: -SIZE is an integer with an optional suffix (example: 10MB). Suffixes are:\n\ -KB 1000, K 1024, MB 1000*1000, M 1024*1024, and so on for G, T, P, E, Z, Y.\n\ +SIZE is an integer with an optional unit, e.g. 10M (1024*1024). Valid units\n\ +are K, M, G, T, P, E, Z, Y (powers of 1024) or KB, MB, ... (powers of 1000).\n\ I guess if we've had 20 chars more or even a whole line then it could be slightly polished to be really readable and clearly. ;) cu, Rudi
