[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject)
From: |
Joern Thyssen |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject) |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:45:42 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:21:53PM +0100, Ian Shaw wrote
[snip]
> I do have sympathy with Olivier & Øystein's view, but would be sad to
> lose the current precision. How would people feel if the percentages
> and std errors were reported to 4 sf, but the overall equity were to 3
> sf?
I think I'll introduce it as an "hidden" option. Does this sounds as a
fair solution?
Jørn
- [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), olivier croisille, 2003/07/16
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), Ian Shaw, 2003/07/16
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), Øystein O Johansen, 2003/07/16
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), olivier croisille, 2003/07/16
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), Ian Shaw, 2003/07/16
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject),
Joern Thyssen <=
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), Michaeldepreli, 2003/07/16
RE: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), olivier croisille, 2003/07/16
RE: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), Ian Shaw, 2003/07/16