IEEE Standards Interpretation for IEEE Std 1003.1™-1990 IEEE Standard for Information Technology--Portable Operating System Interfaces (POSIX®)
Copyright © 2001 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. 3 Park Avenue New York, New York 10016-5997 USA All Rights Reserved.
Interpretations are issued to explain and clarify the intent of a standard and do not constitute an alteration to the original standard. In addition, interpretations are not intended to supply consulting information. Permission is hereby granted to download and print one copy of this document. Individuals seeking permission to reproduce and/or distribute this document in its entirety or portions of this document must contact the IEEE Standards Department for the appropriate license. Use of the information contained in this document is at your own risk.
IEEE Standards Department Copyrights and Permissions 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, New Jersey 08855-1331, USA
Interpretation Request #114
Topic: granularity vs resolution Relevant Sections: P310 L63 PASC
The pharase "maximum allowable resolution" here is potentially ambiguous. Is it the largest value of _POSIX_CLOCKRES_MIN, or the largest value of 1/_POSIX_CLOCKRES_MIN (which have completely opposite senses) what is intended? "Maximum allowable resolution" can be read as "the maximally finest grained resolution permitted" or "the maximally most granular resolution permitted". Intuitively (which doesn't count) the intent is that the "the worst (most granular) acceptable resolution is...". (If you have trouble seeing the first interpretation of the words, consider a situation where the standard wished to prohibit something from getting too fine grained (say because it would overload the system). "The maximum allowable resolution of the system timer interrupt is 1 microsecond, because any smaller value cannot be serviced before the next timer interrupt occurs.")
Change "maximum" to either "poorest" or "largest allowable granularity".
(note this is a dup of #99 which is also open) The standard is clear, there is a good definition already. No change is required.
None. Forwarded to Interpretations group: 19 June 2000 Proposed resolution: 25 July 2000 Finalized interpretation: 29 August 2000