On 2026-08-22 09:31:49 +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen via Mutt-dev wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 03:25:10PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2026-08-21 11:20:26 +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen via Mutt-dev wrote: > > > also, i'd generally speak of precision rather than granularity. to me, the > > > former seems more suggestive of general fuzziness, which seems more > > > fitting > > > here. > > > > No, this is not the same thing. The mtime has had a nanosecond > > precision for years. But the granularity changed recently. > > > and my language intuition says that this is just wrong. > > Teh Bot says https://chatgpt.com/share/6a893fa3-b1e4-83eb-a43d-f38fc2b1c2c0 > which seems to agree.
Well, that's ChatGPT. In the context of clocks, the granularity is how often a clock is updated (the smallest amount that can be obtained between 2 ticks). > but when asked more specifically, it gets closer to your position: > https://chatgpt.com/share/6a8949c3-569c-83eb-a993-dc5e37be6960 > > so i think it's wise to avoid the use of "precision" here, and > instead use "accuracy". I agree that "accuracy" would be better as the granularity is an implementation detail, and what matters for the user is the accuracy. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Pascaline project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
