Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Jim Nasby wrote:
The truth is, virtually no one, even highly technical people, ever
picks nits between kB vs KiB vs KB.
The question isn't so much whether to allow KiB and such -- that would
obviously be trivial. The question is whether we want to have kB mean
1000 bytes instead of 1024 bytes.
Would it satisfy everyone if the documentation states that
specifying a value of "N kB" means that "*at least* N 1000 bytes"
are allocated; and perhaps even documenting that in the current
implementation it happens to be 24 extra bytes.
In my mind, that goes against current practice. The only argument
raised in favor was that international standards require such use. I'm
as much a fan of measurement standards as anyone, but I'm also a
practitioner of current practice.
With the spec reading "at least N KB", even the most pedantic
spec reader can't complain, because it is true.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
