-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 97
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
uncovered code #75
Comments
Don't care. |
It is not clear. What is the expected result of |
Why is that better? This module is approaching 4 million downloads on npm, and you're the first person to raise this concern. Could you explain it in further detail. |
IMO, scientific notation doesn't equate to 'human readable', which why it's never output that. It could of course become a customizable output, and if you would like to see that I'd be willing to take your PR to introduce it. |
There is a first time for everything :) I noticed this while measuring coverage of my Lua version of this function. That line was the only uncovered line in the code. In Lua it becomes scientific notation and in JavaScript it is a plain integer representation.
+1 for this. So "82718061255302770 YB" should be the expected output. I am going to open a pull request adding such test. |
The following case is not tested:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: