From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] build: Fix potential type error when generating
	human-friendly byte count strings.
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 22:42:55 -0400
Message-ID: <87a8svuh8w.fsf@netris.org>
References: <CA+xn8YCMk5tJjB_rEFEPwWm4ef3enCuRJ03PR1f8bH8TvGrUwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40342)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mhw@netris.org>) id 1ZZrqF-00076H-M2
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2015 22:44:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mhw@netris.org>) id 1ZZrqC-00062L-En
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2015 22:44:03 -0400
Received: from world.peace.net ([50.252.239.5]:39926)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mhw@netris.org>) id 1ZZrqC-000612-By
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2015 22:44:00 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CA+xn8YCMk5tJjB_rEFEPwWm4ef3enCuRJ03PR1f8bH8TvGrUwQ@mail.gmail.com>
	(Steve Sprang's message of "Wed, 9 Sep 2015 14:05:35 -0700")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Steve Sprang <steve.sprang@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Steve Sprang <steve.sprang@gmail.com> writes:

> This is a follow up tweak to my previous "progress bar" patch. With a
> really slow throughput it's possible to get fractional sub-KiB byte
> counts, so I added some additional number massaging.

Sounds good!  Looks good to me except for a few minor nits on this
auxiliary procedure:

> +(define (number->integer n)
> +  "Given an arbitrary number N, round it and return the exact result."
> +  (inexact->exact (round n)))

How about calling it "nearest-exact-integer"?  Also, it makes sense only
for real numbers, not arbitrary numbers, and the variable name N is
conventionally used to denote natural numbers, and X for real numbers.

So, how about naming the argument 'x', and using something closer to the
following docstring:

  "Given a real number X, return the nearest exact integer, with ties
going to the nearest exact even integer."

Otherwise, looks good to me.  Can you send an updated patch?

      Mark