>>> On 20.10.15 at 11:46, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 20/10/15 09:34, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 20.10.15 at 10:10, <george.dun...@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >>>> George, Dario, >>>> >>>> it being mostly used in scheduler code, and me considering it quite a >>>> bit easier to compare such big numbers when shown in hex I wonder: >>>> Do you prefer this to stay PRId64, or would you accept it to be >>>> changed to PRIx64 (allowing it to be used in a few other places)? >>> Personally I've never taken the time to familiarize myself with the >>> magnitude of hex numbers vs decimal numbers; so in the case of time, I >>> could easily see that 10000000 nanoseconds is about 1ms; but I don't >>> have a good sense of how long 0x1000000 nanoseconds is. The fact that >>> our times are based on base 10 instead of base 2 is I think as good an >>> argument as any for leaving it as a decimal. >> Well, as long as the number of seconds the value represents is small, >> this indeed is a good argument for using dec. However, already >> when we get into the hour range we're talking about 12-digit values >> without any separators, and at least for me this means counting >> from either end to find a place where to put a mental separator. So >> if staying with dec, perhaps we should make these second based, >> i.e. <ssss>.<nnnnnnnnn>? > > Having a custom %p for this would be very useful.
Yes, that's hat I was considering if we want to stay with decimal. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
