Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #42107
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! |
| Date | 2015-09-22 00:34 +0200 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <mtq0iq$va9$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <ac218bc6-a9cb-47da-b69f-7a612373c302@googlegroups.com> <55d07fd9$0$12303$e4fe514c@textnews.kpn.nl> <c0c50e22-2c98-4dc5-92d2-b80f9ad1826e@googlegroups.com> <afc6c5fb-6b03-4045-8b3b-cad09b6cf615@googlegroups.com> <4419b73e-3a5f-4cce-b048-7e9c09ac67fd@googlegroups.com> |
dylan.mcnamee@gmail.com wrote: > I get these answers: > > should be 231: 230.99999999999997 > should be 0.61: 0.6100000000000001 > should be 0.9: 0.8999999999999999 > should be 1.2: 1.1999999999534339 > should be 0.12: 0.12000000000000001 > > Keeping such errors from affecting end-results is way more effort than > just throwing in a bunch of calls to round(). Well, you probably want BCD floating point, but that just "hides" those errors in decimal representation. The main problem is still there. The problem of Java here is obviously that it prints a few too many digits. The only one that is bound to produce a wrong result with a reasonable amount of digits is the one with the million (test with Gforth): 1.40e 165e f* f. 231. ok 1.03e .42e f- f. 0.61 ok 2.0e 1.1e f- f. 0.9 ok 1e6 1.2e f+ 1e6 f- f. 1.19999999995343 ok 0.1e 0.02e f+ f. 0.12 ok -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ* http://bernd-paysan.de/
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! "Ilya V. Vasilyev" <arvi1973@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 19:22 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-15 20:42 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! "Ilya V. Vasilyev" <arvi1973@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 02:13 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-18 12:09 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-18 15:33 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-18 16:18 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-08-19 08:22 +0000
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-08-19 03:38 -0400
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! "Ilya V. Vasilyev" <arvi1973@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 17:21 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-19 21:07 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-16 06:52 +0000
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-08-16 14:19 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 05:52 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-16 14:42 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! dylan.mcnamee@gmail.com - 2015-09-21 12:02 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-22 00:34 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-26 19:18 +0000
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-16 12:08 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 15:17 -0400
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-08-16 13:47 +0000
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-16 07:54 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-08-16 15:04 +0000
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-08-16 23:56 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2015-08-17 05:57 -0500
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-08-17 13:52 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 05:00 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-08-17 12:03 +0000
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 05:29 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-08-18 09:10 +0000
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-08-17 14:50 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-08-17 19:42 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-08-17 23:16 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-08-18 01:00 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-08-18 01:17 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-08-18 10:12 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Александр Стадниченко <stadnichenko.a.s@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 08:12 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Александр Стадниченко <stadnichenko.a.s@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 08:35 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-26 21:23 +0200
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Александр Стадниченко <stadnichenko.a.s@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 09:55 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Александр Стадниченко <stadnichenko.a.s@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 10:00 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! mhx@iae.nl - 2015-08-16 08:37 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-17 18:28 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-17 20:17 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 00:49 -0400
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-17 23:00 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-08-18 06:25 +0000
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-18 08:39 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 12:09 -0400
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 01:31 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! "Ilya V. Vasilyev" <arvi1973@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 17:47 -0700
Re: Forth without integer data stack. It is even better! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-12 18:06 -0700
csiph-web