Re: inconsistency with Inequality testing and Floor

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg60079] Re: inconsistency with Inequality testing and Floor*From*: "Richard J. Fateman" <fateman at eecs.berkeley.edu>*Date*: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 02:13:13 -0400 (EDT)*Organization*: UC Berkeley*References*: <200508251034.GAA10208@smc.vnet.net> <demmfd$rf1$1@smc.vnet.net>*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Andrzej Kozlowski wrote: > > You cannot expect inexact numbers, particularly "borderline cases" as > in this example, to obey the usual laws of arithmetic. > These inconsistencies are not inherent in computer arithmetic, even floating-point arithmetic. They represent choices made by the designers of Mathematica. In particular, choosing to allow two distinct numbers to be numerically equal leads to problems. I wonder if there is some compensating good reason for this choice in Mathematica. I am not aware of any reason good enough to justify this. Calling a bug a feature does not fix it. RJF

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Re: inconsistency with Inequality testing and Floor***From:*Andrzej Kozlowski <andrzej@akikoz.net>