> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 03:48:53PM -0700, Alexander Kolbasov wrote: > > I was trying to get an average value of a bunch of numbers which could be > > either positive or negative to see whether the average is close to zero. It > > turns out that aggregations (including max, min and avg) treat values as > > unsigned and, thus. do not work as expected for negative values. Do you > > think > > it is a valid RFE to have version of these aggregations which work on > > signed > > data? > > Yes, definitely valid -- especially since quantize()/lquantize() already > correctly deal with negative values. Apologies for that; not quite sure > why I didn't address max()/min()/avg() when I was getting quantize() and > lquantize() to correctly deal with negative data...
So do you think that "the right thing" to do is to fix max()/min()/avg() to treat arguments as signed or to keep these intact and have another set with different names (smax()?) to preserve compatibility with whatever scripts assume the old semantics? - akolb _______________________________________________ dtrace-discuss mailing list [email protected]
