The following reply was made to PR bin/7540; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Mike Cheponis <mac@Wireless.Com>
To: erh@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/7540 (Suggested improvement to "ls")
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 18:17:07 -0700 (PDT)

 Should I submit another PR?
 
 Observe what ls -hl outputs:
 
 -rw-r--r--    1 mac  users   82B Sep 19 04:01 t2.c
 -rw-r--r--    1 mac  users  1.1K Sep 19 04:02 t2.ihx
 -rw-r--r--    1 mac  users  168B Sep 19 04:02 t2.lnk
 -rw-r--r--    1 mac  users  9.9K Sep 19 04:02 t2.lst
 -rw-r--r--    1 mac  users  6.3K Sep 19 04:02 t2.map
 -rw-r--r--    1 mac  users  941B Sep 19 04:02 t2.mem
 -rw-r--r--    1 mac  users  2.1K Sep 19 04:02 t2.rel
 -rw-r--r--    1 mac  users  9.9K Sep 19 04:02 t2.rst
 
 Compare this to what I've suggested:
 
 
 -rw-r--r--  1 mac  users      82 Sep 19 04:01 t2.c
 -rw-r--r--  1 mac  users   1,160 Sep 19 04:02 t2.ihx
 -rw-r--r--  1 mac  users     168 Sep 19 04:02 t2.lnk
 -rw-r--r--  1 mac  users  10,167 Sep 19 04:02 t2.lst
 -rw-r--r--  1 mac  users   6,456 Sep 19 04:02 t2.map
 -rw-r--r--  1 mac  users     941 Sep 19 04:02 t2.mem
 -rw-r--r--  1 mac  users   2,147 Sep 19 04:02 t2.rel
 -rw-r--r--  1 mac  users  10,167 Sep 19 04:02 t2.rst
 
 
 Notice how much easier to read this is versus the "humanized" output.
 
 
 Also note that my merely "scanning" with your eyes, you can VERY quickly see which file is biggest, which is smallest, etc.  Not to mention that you can extract the _exact_ file size with my method.
 
 By introducing two paradigms at once (numbers [truncated at that!]  + some "power of 10" code) the human interface is more complicated.  Plus, it's ugly.
 
 ------
 
 A long time ago, I fixed this problem in my local ls, but at that time, my changes were not accepted back into the tree because I had not made them i18n-compatible (never mind that there _was_ no i18n structure at that time.)
 
 Still, since NetBSD is the finest unix-like OS in the known universe, I do think it's important for details like this to be done right.
 
 Thanks again,
 
 -Mike
 
 
 
 On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, erh@NetBSD.org wrote:
 
 > Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 23:43:52 +0000 (UTC)
 > From: erh@NetBSD.org
 > Reply-To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 > To: erh@NetBSD.org, gnats-admin@NetBSD.org, netbsd-bugs@NetBSD.org,
 >     erh@NetBSD.org, mac@wireless.com
 > Cc: erh@NetBSD.org
 > Subject: Re: bin/7540 (Suggested improvement to "ls")
 > 
 > Synopsis: Suggested improvement to "ls"
 >
 > Responsible-Changed-From-To: bin-bug-people->erh
 > Responsible-Changed-By: erh@netbsd.org
 > Responsible-Changed-When: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 23:43:51 +0000
 > Responsible-Changed-Why:
 > The ls command now has a "-h" option, implementing the humanize number feature.
 > So, it seems like the change requested in this PR to use commas/dots/whatever
 > is no longer really needed.  I'm going to close this.
 >
 >
 > State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
 > State-Changed-By: erh@netbsd.org
 > State-Changed-When: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 23:43:51 +0000
 > State-Changed-Why:
 >
 >
 >