On 23 June 2016 at 09:06, LucaDC <dicappello@...2144...> wrote:
Sebastian Zartner wrote
> Yes, it's more complicated than just parsing the mathematical string,
> though provides more precise results.
> If one of the values is the rounded version of the exact original
> value, it's mapped to the original value in calculations.
So if you directly write a number that falls inside the amount you take as
"rounded version of the exact original value" the program is going to cut it
to the original value. I don't like this approach.
Sebastian Zartner wrote
>> Also, when I hit enter I assume that I'm inputting what I see, not what
>> the
>> program thinks while showing me something different.
>
> So you accept the rounding errors.
If I decide to press enter on a value, I accept (and expect) the number I
see. That's why I think that the relative mode is needed, so you don't have
to care about the original number, if it's rounded or not, if it's nice or
not and so on.
Ok, that's a valid point.
Sebastian Zartner wrote
>> I don't agree that this should be discussed in a different thread because
>> the problem wouldn't even exist without what's in this thread.
>
> That's wrong. The problem already exists today. You can already enter
> calculations into those fields.
> And it applies to all fields allowing calculations, so it's a broader
> issue.
Please, don't mix things.
The problem already exists and is broader than what we're discussing here.
So I agree with what you've written. But that's not the point.
The point is that today we have the relative mode on the guide's dialog that
permits to avoid this issue and lets me move guides with the precision I
need.
Your proposal is to remove a well working feature and substitute it with
another one that you know is not well working.
As a simple solution to this issue I've extended the number of
displayed decimals to five.
Though I've also added back the checkbox.
Sebastian