Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <python@mrabarnett.plus.com>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.002
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:Python': 0.05; 'see.': 0.07; 'agree,': 0.09; 'argument,': 0.09; 'creighton': 0.09; 'differently.': 0.09; 'rounding': 0.09; 'worse': 0.09; 'systems.': 0.11; 'ah,': 0.16; 'fixed-point': 0.16; 'from:addr:mrabarnett.plus.com': 0.16; 'from:addr:python': 0.16; 'from:name:mrab': 0.16; 'message-id:@mrabarnett.plus.com': 0.16; 'perfect.': 0.16; 'received:192.168.1.4': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'laura': 0.18; 'module': 0.23; 'demonstrate': 0.23; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'least': 0.27; 'errors.': 0.27; 'arithmetic': 0.29; 'decimal': 0.29; 'maybe': 0.31; 'related': 0.32; 'point': 0.33; 'problem': 0.33; 'recommended': 0.34; 'subject:?': 0.34; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.35; 'done': 0.35; 'represent': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'subject:" ': 0.36; 'so,': 0.37; 'should': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'von': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:192': 0.39; 'forget': 0.60; 'your': 0.60; 'even': 0.61; 'john': 0.61; '1951': 0.84; 'divided': 0.93
X-CM-Score: 0.00
X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=JOrGyJ+b c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=0nF1XD0wxitMEM03M9B4ZQ==:117 a=0nF1XD0wxitMEM03M9B4ZQ==:17 a=0Bzu9jTXAAAA:8 a=QrohdLjRRo4A:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=EBOSESyhAAAA:8 a=SovRc_l1jAhlS886OrsA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
X-AUTH: mrabarnett@:2500
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:27:21 +0100
From: MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: What is considered an "advanced" topic in Python?
References: <c03de3a7-3429-44a3-8241-5a7d81b9aefc@googlegroups.com> <mailman.192.1432915802.5151.python-list@python.org> <28cec7df-0f51-4098-b027-72e913a9b656@googlegroups.com> <CAPTjJmqZrkSs16SR_ADKZ_cz5tqYBxrVC93sDO3TQ8T+oDEoDA@mail.gmail.com> <1433128706.32838.283108057.2C4C8613@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAPTjJmpmM-jMszyMPSxch5CT4L43cMsXQbkyGGxvFXVpY2CdkA@mail.gmail.com> <201506010758.t517wR9T015894@fido.openend.se> <rosuav@gmail.com> <CAPTjJmrvi0EPyhV49hmqPxi1ztcZHmCn8hKzHhR7Y8_bkd7ZCw@mail.gmail.com> <201506011028.t51ASBVG019928@fido.openend.se> <CAPTjJmrCR6LWApe7UUF9DBCcQe2+hsCYi+s203aENUv2mmvDAA@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.282.1433157907.5151.python-list@python.org> <87iob78wvl.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
In-Reply-To: <87iob78wvl.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.284.1433161645.5151.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 23
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1433161645 news.xs4all.nl 2967 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:52547
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:91663

On 2015-06-01 12:57, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se>:
>
>> Von Neumann recommended against floating-point numbers for the 1951
>> IAS machine, arguing that fixed-point arithmetic is preferable. I
>> agree, but, if John von Neumann couldn't win that argument, then there
>> is no way on earth I could. So, if floating point is going in, at
>> least we should represent them differently.
>
> Your problem is not fixed-point vs floating-point but related to the
> radix. Base-10 floating-point would be perfect for you and base-2
> fixed-point would demonstrate even worse rounding errors.
>
>> But, hell, I write accounting and bookkeeping systems.
>
> Ah, I see.
>
> In 1951, decimal numbers would have done little good in the UK with the
> pound divided into 20 shillings and the shilling into 12 pence. Maybe a
> "Babylonian" module would have been perfect.
>
Don't forget that there was also a ha'penny (half-penny).