Fun fact: if you draw this out in salt, you summon and bind a minor demon of fractions. They're useful for converting measurements, but occasionally divide by zero and the resulting undefined state eats the universe for a bit until it sorts itself out.
In the early 1980s I worked as a software developer for a weighing equipment company that supplied machines to small shops, supermarkets etc.
The calculations were nuts for imperial units. Luckily the UK money by then was decimal. But even multiplying imperial weights by decimal money was complex coding. Would have been worse if the money had still been pounds shillings and pence.
@ottaross@iko I would be very surprised if the US cup, tablespoon and teaspoon represent the same volumes as Canada's metric cups, tablespoons and teaspoons.
In the Swedish kitchen a tablespoon is 15 ml and a teaspoon is 5 ml, is that what Canada uses too?
@iko I like to point out that in the battle between Imperial and metric, cups and spoons are neutral.
As a Canadian I've long ago dropped gallons, quarts, pints and ounces (fluid and weight - WTF was that?), but still embrace cups and spoons along with my grams and milliliters.
Cups and spoons are neutral, object-oriented and coexist nicely with the sanity of metric. One cup as 250ml is key info.
@clacke In France, old recipes still measure in cl = centilitre. 1 cl = 10 ml. But Millilitre/litre are the norm today. Besides that, we have approximate (!) measurements varying to your kitchen equipment: 1 tablespoon, 1 coffeespoon (like in Germany we prefer coffee) or a pinch. As Ross says, it's simply object-oriented (the size of a pinch varies with the size of your fingers) and means: A very tiny amount = pinch, more than a pinch = small spoon, less than a handful = tablespoon. No norms.