jbwebb

tourist wrote:



Oh, really? Do people really understand that when talking about bandwidth or processor speed the prefixes have decimal meanings?

Anyone technical enough to know about bytes, bits and hertz would be aware of the peculiarity about measuring quantities of bytes.

I'm not saying it's correct, it's just the way it is. Standards are often illogical. For example, how many standard definitions of a 'mile' are there? Imperial, US Survey, Nautical, Roman, etc. Which one of those is correct?

This could make a good poll for the other Niners:
How many of you are using or plan to use correct SI units?

one kibibit	1 Kibit = 210 bit = 1024 bit
one kilobit	1 kbit = 103 bit = 1000 bit
one mebibyte	1 MiB = 220 B = 1 048 576 B
one megabyte	1 MB = 106 B = 1 000 000 B
one gibibyte	1 GiB = 230 B = 1 073 741 824 B
one gigabyte	1 GB = 109 B = 1 000 000 000 B

cain wrote:



How is using the wrong values more logical just because we're talking about binary data?  G, M, k, etc. are all decimal prefixes.  What is more logical is to use the binary prefixes (Gi, Mi, Ki, etc.) when talking about binary data.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix

From the same article:

"However, they have not yet been widely adopted by manufacturers and individuals; many continue to use the SI prefixes in a binary sense, despite the lack of support from official bodies. As a result, there is no unambiguous notation for decimal multiples of bits and bytes."

The current methodology may not be strictly correct but it is understood. Can you imagine the resulting mess from changing binary data metrics at this late stage?

Hi, thanks for your great response.

I ran InvokeStress against a little multi-threaded app of mine and it coped fairly well with the 'carpet bombing' input. (I've noticed that Alt+F4 seems to be the best way of aborting the driven application.)

One issue that did come to light was that my winform layout needed to be tightened up since InvokeStress set up some weird dimensions that I'd never have tried.
I'll definitely be using this in future, it's a powerful technique.

- Jonathan

Hi, thanks for the interesting video.

How safe is this to leave unattended? Having tested it, I think I'd prefer to let it crunch away on a VM rather than on my main dev machine.

Also, how difficult would it be to adapt this technique to record your (or your users') actions as you drive your application?
This would be a very fast way of building up test scenarios for later playback.


- Jonathan

Fascinating stuff. The potential for this is truly astounding!
How does programming with this library compare with other concurrent languages such as Occam-pi?

BTW Is that a pyramid of 14 patent cubes in the background??

- Jonathan

Many thanks, I enjoyed this.

It's always good to hear some real opinions being expressed.
One of the highlights here is when Tony called the product name of XCal "disgusting" (48:30)


The other Behind The Code episodes have been excellent too. Are there any plans to release these more often?


Jonathan