Thank you very much for the patch!I am going to study this program
in more detail to find out what exactly would have to be changed to make
it 100% compliant.
-John
Antonio Zerbinati wrote:
No need to argue... with this tiny patch wget will print nice and
standard KiB MiB GiB binary
No need to argue... with this tiny patch wget will print nice and
standard KiB MiB GiB binary units... A don't like ambiguity, not binary.
Hope this will help futile discussion about 10 way of look at the
world... and Merry Christmass to everyone, to people that understand
binary, people
Hello,
On 24-Dec-04, you wrote:
Yeah, you're both right. While we're at it, why don't we just round off the
value of pi to be 3.0. Those pesky trailing decimals are just an accident
of history anyway.
.sorry for my stupid interferrence - don't blame it on history, blame it
on Intel's
That story is hilarious. Thanks for sharing! As to kilo vs kibi, it's
not the case that I can't think in binary (I use it all the time) or
even that the use of kilo to mean 1024 troubles me in itself. It is
that I have found no consistency in the context in which the word kilo
reliably
John J Foerch wrote:
It seems that the system of using the metric prefixes for numbers 2^n is a
simple accident of history. Any thoughts on this?
I would say that the practice of using powers of 10 for K and M is a
response to people who cannot think in binary.
Tony
On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 12:57:18PM -0800, Tony Lewis wrote:
John J Foerch wrote:
It seems that the system of using the metric prefixes for numbers 2^n is a
simple accident of history. Any thoughts on this?
I would say that the practice of using powers of 10 for K and M is a
response to
Carlos Villegas snidely wrote:
I would say that the original poster understands what he is saying, and
you clearly don't...
I'll put my computer science degree up against your business administration
and accounting degree any day.
A kilobyte has always been 1024 bytes and the choice was not
To: Tony Lewis
Cc: wget@sunsite.dk
Subject: Re: Metric units
On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 12:57:18PM -0800, Tony Lewis wrote:
John J Foerch wrote:
It seems that the system of using the metric prefixes for numbers
2^n is a simple accident of history. Any thoughts on this?
I would say
Mark Post wrote:
While we're at it, why don't we just round off the value of pi to be 3.0
Do you live in Indiana?
Actually, Dr. Edwin Goodwin wanted to round off pi to any of several values
including 3.2.
http://www.agecon.purdue.edu/crd/Localgov/Second%20Level%20pages/Indiana_Pi_
Story.htm
No, but that particular bit of idiocy was the inspiration for my comment. I
just took it one decimal point further.
-Original Message-
From: Tony Lewis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 2:22 AM
To: wget@sunsite.dk
Subject: RE: Metric units
Mark Post wrote
10 matches
Mail list logo
