-
Feature Request
-
Resolution: Done
-
Critical
-
1.2.13.Final, 1.3.7.Final
The int type is too restrictive for specifying the decay factor.
Using a decay factor of 1 means no decay.
Next value is 2, and the importance of loads decreases too fast:
| Instant | Importance |
|---|---|
| 0 | 100% |
| 1 | 50% |
| 2 | 25% |
| 3 | 12.5% |
| 4 | 6.3% |
| 5 | 3.1% |
| 6 | 1.6% |
| 7 | 0.8% |
| 8 | 0.4% |
| 9 | 0.2% |
Next value is 3, and the importance of loads decreases even faster:
| Instant | Importance |
|---|---|
| 0 | 100% |
| 1 | 33% |
| 2 | 11% |
| 3 | 3.7% |
| 4 | 1.2% |
| 5 | 0.4% |
| 6 | 0.1% |
| 7 | 0.0% |
| 8 | 0.0% |
| 9 | 0.0% |
Using a double for decay factor isn't complex and allows much more precision.
