Re: bug in IntegerPart ?

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg47809] Re: bug in IntegerPart ?*From*: Bill Rowe <readnewsciv at earthlink.net>*Date*: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 04:47:51 -0400 (EDT)*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

On 4/26/04 at 2:41 AM, ancow65 at yahoo.com (AC) wrote: >"DrBob" <drbob at bigfoot.com> wrote in message >news:<c6g015$4lk$1 at smc.vnet.net>... >>There's NO reason to be puzzled. 1.65 and 1.3 can't be represented >>exactly in binary, so of course their difference may not be exact, >>either. Hence the division problems have different numerators. > >Your 'explanation' makes no sense whatsoever. Mathematica's binary >representations of 1.65-1.3 and 0.35 are the same. That can be seen >by comparing BaseForm[1.65 - 1.3, 2] with BaseForm[0.35,2] BaseForm isn't doing what you think and will not show the difference. BaseForm controls only the display of a number. By default Mathematica displays a number to 6 significant digits. Both 1.65 - 1.3 and .35 are the same to 6 significant digits. Consequently, these will display the same when using BaseForm. To see the difference use RealDigits or FullForm. Both of these clearly show the difference between 1.65 - 1.3 and .35. >(n = 2^^0.010110011001100110011 ) > => 0.350000 Right, here you've inputed a number accurate to 6 significant digits. So, Mathematica displays 6 significant digits > Notice the unussual display of trailing zeros. No, not unusual. Exactly as it should be. If I input 6 significant digits as .35`6, I expect Mathematica to display 6 significant digits with the default settings. >Additionally, a completely legitimate expression >2^^BaseForm[0.35`, 2] >produces a syntax error message. The expression 2^^BaseForm[0.35, 2] isn't a legitimate expression. BaseForm puts a wrapper on the expression to control display. That is Head at BaseForm[0.35, 2] is BaseForm, not a sequence of binary digits. -- To reply via email subtract one hundred and four