Artturi Alm <artturi....@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 12:03:31PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote: >> So, I wonder why you are choosing kPa vs hPa, and if that choice ends >> up being a framework choice for everything. And how the rest of the >> world deals with this issue. > > By accident, i guess, and after having read about pascals on wiki[0], > it felt like a good choice, for being "not just for meteorologists", > nor imperial, but i'm from metric .eu, fwiw..
Interesting article, and it seems right. Atmospheric pressure is basically meteorology, IMHO. > I actually got *= 1000 for mPa in the driver, so i don't really care > about the unit to be used, as long as it's not loosing any precision/ > limiting range (for kernel -> user, so Pa would work just as well, and > i'm not sure whether mPa does buy anything w/r.t. future sensors, it > was more about minimal diff looking reasonable). The comments about integers, range and precision are compelling. It's hard to imagine anything in envsys delivering more than 1 Pa of precision. I didn't mean to give you a really hard time about this. It just felt like a decision that was likely to control how all envsys pressure reporting is done in NetBSD, for all time. But maybe I'm misperceiving that.
