Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #41105

Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms?

From John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.lang.javascript
Subject Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms?
Date 2022-10-15 15:56 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <tiehnp$2pf9o$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <31753076-4806-4dd3-8577-40a4ed23b57dn@googlegroups.com> <tidnpc$1vh5$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tie14h$2lmqv$1@dont-email.me> <tie6cf$1rda$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On 15/10/2022 12:43, R.Wieser wrote:

   <snip>
>> Anyway, floating point numbers are accurate enough to indicate the
>> relativity effect of someone going past you on a bicycle so I don't think
>> there's a problem.
> 
> :-) The fact that that BigInt float exists (or even a 80-bit float) does
> seem to indicate that there are people out there that disagree with you.
   <Snip>

I was indicating that it's not a "can of worms".

   John

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-10-14 15:52 -0700
  Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-10-15 01:52 +0100
  Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2022-10-15 09:33 +0200
    Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2022-10-15 10:00 +0200
    Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2022-10-15 11:13 +0100
      Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2022-10-15 13:43 +0200
        Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2022-10-15 15:56 +0100
          Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2022-10-15 17:44 +0200
  Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-10-15 14:25 +0200
    Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2022-10-15 16:31 +0200
      Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2022-10-15 16:22 +0100
        Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-10-15 17:04 +0100
          Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-10-15 09:47 -0700
            Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-10-15 18:51 +0200
              Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-10-22 14:35 -0700
                Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 09:02 -0800
  Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-10-17 02:00 -0700
    Re: Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms? Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-10-18 07:40 -0700

csiph-web