Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica > #1994 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Bill Rowe <readnews@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-04-29 11:34 +0000 |
| Last post | 2011-04-29 11:34 +0000 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica
Re: MachinePrecision vs. Arbitrary Precision Bill Rowe <readnews@sbcglobal.net> - 2011-04-29 11:34 +0000
| From | Bill Rowe <readnews@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-04-29 11:34 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: MachinePrecision vs. Arbitrary Precision |
| Message-ID | <ipe7n9$r2c$1@smc.vnet.net> |
On 4/28/11 at 6:33 AM, mukasa@gmail.com (Sseziwa Mukasa) wrote: >On Apr 27, 2011, at 5:39 AM, Rafael Dunn wrote: >lthe behavior of N[e] and N[e,p] is different even if p >= MachinePrecision, Not correct as easily demonstrated by: In[1]:= a = RealDigits[N[Pi]]; p = MachinePrecision; b = RealDigits[N[Pi, p]]; a === b Out[4]= True But note if you use $MachinePrecision instead of MachinePrecision, then you do get a different behavior, i.e. In[5]:= a = N[Pi, MachinePrecision] Out[5]= 3.14159 In[6]:= b = N[Pi, $MachinePrecision] Out[6]= 3.141592653589793 But what is being retained is still identical in both cases. In[7]:= a === b Out[7]= True
Back to top | Article view | comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica
csiph-web