Eric Saxe wrote: > Alexander Kolbasov wrote: >>> Mark Haywood wrote: >>> >>>> If I thought it was common to see more than 4-5 P-states I'd prefer the >>>> range. My minimal experience has been that more than 4 is uncommon. So, >>>> if I absolutely had to give an opinion? Yeah, I think that the separate >>>> list of frequencies is better. >>>> >>>> >>> What if psrinfo(1M) went with the range if the number of frequencies (or >>> the string length) exceeded some threshold? >>> >> It is a possibility, although it is a bit odd to change the semantics based >> on >> the length of the output string. Let's play with the current version and get >> a >> feeling of how useful is it. >> >> BTW, what do we do with it? Should I integrate it in some of your PM >> repositories or it is ok living as a flying dutchman in mailing lists? >> > I was thinking it would be nice to have in the cpupm-gate as a nice > thing to have while things are being developed. Mark, what do you think? > We can also make it available via a link on the front project page. > Since it's just a perl script, it's easy to install :)
Sure. The cpupm-gate would be a good home.
