Software Versioning Explained

Honest Abe

New Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2024
Messages
2
Reaction score
2
DE Number
191
1000025621.webp

Got an alert...to? Downgrade??
 
View attachment 23739
Got an alert...to? Downgrade??
Oh, Oh... Here we go again! Version numbering is strange in the software world. 2.4.10 comes LATER than 2.4.4 does. Think of it this way... If it's just a single digit after the last dot, imagine a hidden zero behind that dot, such that 2.4.4 becomes 2.4.04. Then, it makes sense why 2.4.10 comes later. Please don't ask me to explain the logic of this, because it baffles me too! :)
 
Oh, Oh... Here we go again! Version numbering is strange in the software world. 2.4.10 comes LATER than 2.4.4 does. Think of it this way... If it's just a single digit after the last dot, imagine a hidden zero behind that dot, such that 2.4.4 becomes 2.4.04. Then, it makes sense why 2.4.10 comes later. Please don't ask me to explain the logic of this, because it baffles me too! :)
That's not quite right either, 2.4.100 is still after 2.4.1 and 2.4.10. These are not decimal points, version numbers aren't fractions, they're just separators. Think of them as commas if that makes you happier - version 2, 4, 10.
 
Oh, Oh... Here we go again! Version numbering is strange in the software world. 2.4.10 comes LATER than 2.4.4 does. Think of it this way... If it's just a single digit after the last dot, imagine a hidden zero behind that dot, such that 2.4.4 becomes 2.4.04. Then, it makes sense why 2.4.10 comes later. Please don't ask me to explain the logic of this, because it baffles me too! :)
10 is higher than 4. Simple enough.
 
Please tell me we’re not going to have to explain this every time.
I'll be glad to tell you that. But I'm afraid it won't help. 2.4.4 isn't a decimal number to begin with. Decimal numbers don't have multiple decimal points. So I don't see why anybody would think that the part after the second decimal point represents a fraction of anything. The logic simply isn't there. It also defies sense to think that a release number could somehow be fractional. Something could be the 4th release or the fifth release, but can't be the 4.4th release. So thinking of it as a decimal number makes zero sense to begin with. What Lucid is doing is entirely consistent with what other companies do with software releases or versions.
Got it. Now, my telematics control system is now completely robust.
Mine isn't, but I don't have the update yet. I look forward to it. There have been lots of threads related to the TCU, even though they didn't mention the TCU explicitly.
 
Not if the number is a decimal.
OK, and gravity doesn't work if you're in the vacuum of space.

It isn't a decimal. It is semantic versioning.

That it looks like a floating point number, or a decimal, is coincidental and unfortunate, but no different from a basketball looking similar to a baseball, superficially. But I still wouldn't use one to play the game of the other.
 
I'll be glad to tell you that. But I'm afraid it won't help. 2.4.4 isn't a decimal number to begin with. Decimal numbers don't have multiple decimal points. So I don't see why anybody would think that the part after the second decimal point represents a fraction of anything. The logic simply isn't there. It also defies sense to think that a release number could somehow be fractional. Something could be the 4th release or the fifth release, but can't be the 4.4th release. So thinking of it as a decimal number makes zero sense to begin with. What Lucid is doing is entirely consistent with what other companies do with software releases or versions.

Mine isn't, but I don't have the update yet. I look forward to it. There have been lots of threads related to the TCU, even though they didn't mention the TCU explicitly.
Cool.. it's a painless update. It mentioned the TCM on my app while installing. James Earl Jones mentioned it, too at 2:44 on the video:
 
OK, and gravity doesn't work if you're in the vacuum of space.
Technically, you are always subject to the effects of gravity even from very distant objects. It might not make a practical difference though, not that being out in the middle of the vacuum of space is particularly practical very often.
 
Not if the number is a decimal.
It’s not. There’s no number in any kind of math with two decimals. It’s like a URL where the “.” simply separates whole numbers.
 
some people have to argue somewhere and somehow.. it's becoming a pattern now..
 
Oh, Oh... Here we go again! Version numbering is strange in the software world. 2.4.10 comes LATER than 2.4.4 does. Think of it this way... If it's just a single digit after the last dot, imagine a hidden zero behind that dot, such that 2.4.4 becomes 2.4.04. Then, it makes sense why 2.4.10 comes later. Please don't ask me to explain the logic of this, because it baffles me too! :)
who invented 0, making our life's difficult? why doesn't it matter when 0 is before any number and why does it matter when 0 is after any number. Seems illogical to me ;)
 
who invented 0, making our life's difficult? why doesn't it matter when 0 is before any number and why does it matter when 0 is after any number. Seems illogical to me ;)
The Greeks, Romans, and Chinese did not have zeros until after the 8th century. As far as we know, the great Arab mathematician, al-Khwarizmi was the first to use a "zero, 0." So, blame him.
 
Technically, you are always subject to the effects of gravity even from very distant objects. It might not make a practical difference though, not that being out in the middle of the vacuum of space is particularly practical very often.
cool. cool cool cool.
 
Not if the number is a decimal.
Do you know of any decimal numbers that have two decimal points?

It's not a decimal.

It's similar to how some people put dashes between numbers in their phone numbers, while some put periods. 555-5555 vs 555.5555

Would anyone call the second example there a decimal number?


Numbers get separated by all sorts of delineators. Some use commas. Some dashes. Some spaces. Some hyphens. It's just a sequence of delineated numbers. 2, 4, 10. Big version, minor version, release version. For whatever reason, computer folks like using periods as delineators. I didn't make that decision. And neither did Lucid.
 
I don't get the seeming anger over people's confusion with Lucid's OTA release numbering scheme. Most people are not software engineers, so when they are exposed to an apparent numerical inconsistency for the first time, they are bound to be confused. I, like many of us, have been there in past instances, so I'm sympathetic when some newcomers are scratching their heads. It's a teaching/learning opportunity!
 
Back
Top