[Ffmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Print KB for 1024 bytes

Måns Rullgård mans
Thu Feb 15 14:53:08 CET 2007


Michel Bardiaux said:
> Panagiotis Issaris wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> M?ns Rullg?rd schreef:
> [snip]
>>> They ARE both right.  That is the historical use of kilo when talking
>>> about bytes and bitstreams.  When specifying the size of RAM chips,
>>> kilo of course means 1024.  It's all in the context.
>
> Come on, its like the y2k bug, there never was any, it was always clear
> from the context what year was meant :-)

This is only an informational message.  The Y2k thing was never a problem
in normal situations.  Why, nobody ever mistook a year given as "75" for
1875, did they?

>> I do not think that the meaning of units should be context dependent.
>> Especially not when the context is so closely related.
>>
> [snip]
>
>>> I agree, and I will personally revert any commits introducing this madness into
>>> ffmpeg.
>> IMHO the "madness" lies with those who thought 1024 was "close enough"
>> to 1000 to
>> reuse the 'k' prefix for it.
>>
>> And for the end-user, the "madness" lies in the fact that he sees "kB"
>> but can't be sure if it means 1000 or 1024, because he doesn't know the
>> context in which to use either. A bit as with harddrive sizes.
>
> HaND,
> --
> Michel Bardiaux
> R&D Director
> T +32 [0] 2 790 29 41
> F +32 [0] 2 790 29 02
> E mailto:mbardiaux at mediaxim.be
>
> Mediaxim NV/SA
> Vorstlaan 191 Boulevard du Souverain
> Brussel 1160 Bruxelles
> http://www.mediaxim.com/
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at mplayerhq.hu
> http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

DAMMIT, WILL YOU EVER LEARN TO TRIM YOUR REPLIES?

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com




More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list