On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:45:45AM -0400, Rick Collins wrote: > OR... the tool can be changed to remove the > limitation by using 1 nm as the base unit which can represent both > metric and inches ***WITHOUT ANY LOSS OF PRECISION***. It is that > simple. Why adopt a messy, complex, error prone solution when a > solution is available that deals with the problem simply, accurately > and permanently? >
I think we have all agreed to use nm as the base unit. Karl is arguing the merits of floating point versus integer math as an entirely separate issue. Personally, I don't see the point. Rounding to the nearest nm is easy to understand and more than precise enough for any non-CPU-core work (and even then..). Floating point is not so easy to understand, because you are rounding to a floating degree of precision -- which will nearly always be sufficient, but still hard to calculate. Plus, floating point is scary. That's a real argument, because it affects developer confidence in the code, confuses analysis, and might discourage future developers. Andrew _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
