Ok guys ..I understand the science here but I learned a K = 1024 bytes not 1000 ...am I too old school .....
Scott ford www.identityforge.com from my IPAD 'Infinite wisdom through infinite means' On May 2, 2013, at 4:08 PM, Charles Mills <[email protected]> wrote: > You do get it! <g> Your second sentence is a perfect exposition of what I was > trying to ask. Your last paragraph is a perfect exposition of the problem I > am solving with the "K" notation. > > Thanks all, especially JG. > > "Scaled" seems to be pretty good. Not sure what the opposite is? "NoScaled"? > "Unscaled"? > > INTFMT(SCALED|NOSCALED) > > Decimal does not really cut it because it's base ten in any event, and a > decimal point is absent in any event. Binary would be confusing, I think. > > I hear the people complaining about "nudity" (ahem) but the units are already > specified. Giving an example, devoid here of all context > > BytesIn = 25.7K, BytesOut = 286.4M > > Yeah, I suppose it might say just plain In = 25.7KB, but, as we say, "the > program doesn't work that way." (Also, due to other constraints it MUST > appear in a "string" format message, not in tabular form like most mainframe > reports.) > > And yes, I am doing it "with my own code" -- there is no built-in support in > the language I am using (C++). > > Charles > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Joel C. Ewing > Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 3:30 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OT - What is the proper term for "K" notation? > > I get it. The question is not about what scaling factor is being specified, > or even the name of a specific measurement units designation, but a more > general-level question of what kind of name would one give to the concept of > a scaled number representation like "23.5K" or "23.6M", if for example you > were writing a computer output routine to print a number in that format, > rather than printing it as an integer format, or a fixed point value format, > or floating point value with exponent format. > > Perhaps you could just call it a "scaled integer value" where "M" is an > indication of scaling factor, but I can't recall ever hearing someone attempt > to give such an external notation a formal name. The usage of "M" in a > context like "MB" is as a prefix, and the standards of which I am aware only > formally define its usage when combined with a unit of measurement, not > stand-alone. The latter format (45600000) I would simply call "integer" or > possibly "unscaled integer" if the other is > called "scaled". The term "scaled integer" does appear in the context > of some languages like COBOL, but it applies to the implied 10**n multiplier > in an internal data representation, not to scaling specific to input or > output of values. > > One can certainly find examples of applications, particularly in the > interactive world, where output values are dynamically scaled so as to > display the most significant digits while still using a limited number of > characters as the values get increasingly large: > as in displaying "900 B" as "900 B", but "212,123 B" as "212.1 KB", > "616,212,123 B" as "616.2MB", etc.. It would make sense to be able to > generalize such a numeric format in the absence of a specific measurement > unit, but I'm not sure what I would call it other than > "dynamically scaled integer". There surely must a programming language > somewhere with direct support for such an output format. I'm just not > personally aware of any. > Joel C. Ewing > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
