This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GC statistics tweaks
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:28:53PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 10:39:45AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > type_decl 53 6.62k 10.284
> > var_decl 4 512 0.776
> >
> > IOW, I want the decimal point and fractional digits left out if the
> > fraction is zero after rounding, but I still want the number aligned
> > as if they were there. Does anyone know how to make printf do this?
>
> Is it useful to have a decimal point at all? I think you should
> either leave the scaling out, so that you get exact results, or
> not rescale until you get to 10000 units. 6479K seems better to
> me than 6.33M.
The whole point of the patch was to scale down the byte counts so
they're comprehensible by humans. For me, at least, that means
dropping as many powers of 1024 as possible. If the computer doesn't
do it for me, I have to do it in my head in order to get any use out
of the data. I'm not wedded to decimal points for the kilobyte range,
but in the megabyte range I'd much rather read 6.33M than 6479k.
This is no doubt one of those reasonable-people-may-disagree things.
I don't think it's worth making it an option, though, and if consensus
is to use 6479k, I'll change the patch.
zw