top | item 42761189

(no title)

UndefinedRef | 1 year ago

Maybe he meant dekaseconds? Still weird though..

discuss

order

TonyTrapp|1 year ago

It reads like the intention was that turning the parameter (0/1) command into an integer parameter, where the previous value enabled = 1 should behave reasonably close to the old behaviour. 1 deciseconds is arguably close enough to instant. If the parameter were measured in seconds, the command would always have to wait a whole second before executing, with no room for smaller delays.

bot403|1 year ago

No, smaller delays <1s are also a misdesign here. Have we all forgotten we're reacting to typos? It's an error condition. It's ok that the user feels it and is inconvenienced. They did something wrong.

Do some think that 900ms, or 800, or some other sub-second value is really what we need for this error condition? Instead of, you know, not creating errors?

schacon|1 year ago

We had this debate internally at GitButler. Deci versus deca (and now deka, which appears to also be a legit spelling). My assumption was that 1 full second may have felt too long, but who really knows.

a3w|1 year ago

deci is 1/10, deca is 10/1. So decisecond is correct.