Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 9 Apr 1998 12:48:54 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Stan on the large files LISTF thing, after Jeff's latest:
>> There are several people who think that supplying both KB
>> and MB on the same line (,20 output) is redundant and
>> wasteful. Still under .....
> Me too! At best, it's a useless waste of space. At worst, the
> user will look at the two columns, and say: *WHY* .....
The more I look at this, the more I think doing both a "K BYTES"
*and* a "M BYTES" column is a mistake, for reasons that were
well-put by Stan.
>> - if a file uses any disk space its KB and MB values will not be 0.
>> (better to overstate disk usage than to understate it)
> UGLY, and highly misleading! That's why the decimal point
> was invented, ......
With all due respect, and no offense intended:
What he said. :-)
> Which is more clear:
[....SNIP the less-desirable choices....]
<< ACCOUNT= SYS GROUP= OTHER
> FILENAME CODE ------------LOGICAL RECORD------------
> -------SPACE-------
> SIZE TYP EOF LIMIT #
> MB
> TINY 80B FA 1 1 0.004
> MB
> BIG 1024B FA 1024 1023 1
> MB
>
> Tip: the answer is: the last one. >>
>
Didn't even need the tip on this one: ONE glance at the above
right-hand column gives you the numbers you need to know,
*and* an instant mental calibration of the relative size of the
files.... Unless it is just absolutely impossible to deal with a
decimal point in the "SPACE" data, I continue to plug for
Stan's above "the last one"....
Ken Sletten
|
|
|