Comments for The Frink Language
Re: version info
Oops, something weird happened with the Command-Line Options link above.
Re: version info
> There doesn't seem to be any way to find
> out what version of
> frink a particular copy is, e.g. a -v
> command line option.
> Is there? If not, how come?
>
Because ye 'ave never asked, Bill, me laddie! I've had some version code floating around, but I never checked it in. You'll note that the current version of Frink (2005-12-14) does have a -v or --version command-line switch to display the version number and exit. Please see the Command-Line Options section of the documentation. Hope this helps! I may add a feature to access this programmatically later.
version info
There doesn't seem to be any way to find out what version of
frink a particular copy is, e.g. a -v command line option.
Is there? If not, how come?
Re: Frink missing Saybolt seconds?
Thanks for the references on the viscosity measurements! I looked a bit further and, as you mentioned, these numbers seem to be empirically measured at only a couple of very specific temperatures, so a conversion to a single viscosity value may be pretty questionable. I'll do some further research to see if this can be turned into a more continuous function for a reasonable temperature range.
There are lots of similar physical-chemical measurements that I'd like to put into Frink, but to do it right, there are usually many parameters that need to be specified. For example, if you want to know the density of carbon, you'd also need to specify at what temperature and pressure, and what phase (e.g. graphite or diamond or buckyballs?) It's all feasible, but the number of parameters that one needs to specify (or implicitly accept defaults for) may be large.
Thanks for the suggestions! If you can suggest an interpolating function, let me know!
Frink missing Saybolt seconds?
Hi Alan,
As a fan of conversion utilities (you might take comfort in the fact that you're not alone,) I was just blown away by Frink. So, I've been reading units.txt (very humorous in spots, btw :-) and passed by viscosity without seeing Saybolt seconds, the measure of which is how motor oil is marketed in the U.S.
A quick google turned up a somewhat inadequate conversion chart on pump.net (pump.net/liquiddata/ki...)
I found a much better explanation here. (www.chris-longhurst.co...)
I don't know if you want to include any conversions (as according to Mr. Longhurst the viscosity conversion appears to be empirically derived rather than calculated.) But, I thought I'd drop you this note.
Good
Thanks, I like it very much.