Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.misc |
| References | (1 earlier) <5360da8d$0$17144$c3e8da3$dd9697d2@news.astraweb.com> <ljr6f8$6mn$1@dont-email.me> <53616180$0$59815$c3e8da3$e074e489@news.astraweb.com> <gknav.371282$sa2.196137@fx33.am4> <bsuj7gFd631U1@mid.individual.net> |
| Subject | Re: BASIC is 50 |
| Message-ID | <Xtpav.335997$5V5.276603@fx08.am4> (permalink) |
| Organization | virginmedia.com |
| Date | 2014-05-07 13:14 +0100 |
"Huge" <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote in message news:bsuj7gFd631U1@mid.individual.net... > On 2014-05-07, BartC <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> "Rich" <rich@example.com> wrote in message >> news:53616180$0$59815$c3e8da3$e074e489@news.astraweb.com... >>> Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote: >> >>> 99.7099999999999999436561815002733055735006928443908691406250000000000000 >>> >>> This is why floating point can be dangerous, and why floating point >>> should _NEVER_ ever be used to compute monetary values: >> >> Why not? Because the result might be off by a quadrillionth of a cent? >> >> Use rounding properly and it can be made to work (unless you're dealing >> with >> very large amounts such as the US debt then it's a bit trickier to avoid >> errors starting to affect the cents). > > Pretty obvious you've never worked in finance or banking. I've written software that worked with currency. I used floating point. But not for banking. (In that particular application, it needed to work in two linked currencies. The conversion rate between them was such that one or the other would generally always be a fraction of a cent wrong, rounded to the nearest cent.) The only issue that might arise (and I can't remember it happening in my code), is in rounding a value ending in 0.5 cents or very close, then you have to decide to round up or down. The result might however have to match the same calculation done elsewhere, where the rounding might be the other way because their floating point result is different. (But there are ways of getting consistent, portable floating point results too.) (In any case, typical 64-bit floating point can represent amounts up to nearly $100 trillion, expressed in whole cents.) -- Bartc
Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
BASIC is 50 Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-04-30 09:34 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-04-30 03:42 -0700
Re: BASIC is 50 Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-04-30 10:46 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-04-30 12:03 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-04-30 11:12 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-04-30 15:56 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-04-30 20:41 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-04-30 18:38 -0600
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-01 02:38 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-04-30 22:50 -0600
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-04-30 20:48 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-05-02 09:27 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-02 09:50 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-07 10:48 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-07 10:57 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-07 11:20 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-07 13:14 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-07 16:05 +0300
Re: BASIC is 50 Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-08 18:06 +0200
Re: BASIC is 50 Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-08 20:17 +0300
Re: BASIC is 50 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 16:08 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-07 18:38 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 19:09 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-07 19:08 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 greymausg@mail.com - 2014-05-08 10:15 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-08 11:38 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-08 17:55 +0200
Re: BASIC is 50 Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-08 17:44 +0200
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-12 12:39 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-12 16:06 +0300
Re: BASIC is 50 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-12 22:48 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-13 12:03 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-13 13:23 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-13 16:22 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-13 19:42 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-13 19:49 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-14 01:09 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-14 09:51 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 bde@besplex.bde.org (Bruce Evans) - 2014-05-14 10:36 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-14 12:58 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 bde@besplex.bde.org (Bruce Evans) - 2014-05-14 16:13 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-14 19:24 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-13 15:50 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-01 02:50 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2014-05-01 09:06 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-05-01 09:56 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-01 10:25 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-01 16:43 +0300
Re: BASIC is 50 Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-05-01 18:03 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-01 21:35 +0000
Re: BASIC is 50 Rob <monst.oorzudo@ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-01 22:41 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2014-05-02 09:26 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-05-02 10:46 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-02 23:11 +0100
Re: BASIC is 50 Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2014-04-30 17:51 +0300
Re: BASIC is 50 Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2014-05-14 17:40 +0100
csiph-web