|
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Numerical accuracy/precision - this is a bug or a feature?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg120115] Re: Numerical accuracy/precision - this is a bug or a feature?
- From: DrMajorBob <btreat1 at austin.rr.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 04:56:27 -0400 (EDT)
This happens in EVERY language that converts decimal (real) input to
binary storage.
Binary storage is not mathematically required, but the result is MUCH
faster code. Perhaps, at some point, we'll abandon this trade-off when
computers are so fast that the gain in speed isn't worth the confusion.
But that day isn't here, yet.
(Well. It is for ME, but not for a lot of other, very impatient people. If
they can get a result in a second with decimal arithmetic, they'd rather
have it in a microsecond with binary arithmetic, no matter WHAT the cost
in confusion factors.)
Bobby
On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 06:31:49 -0500, slawek <slawek at host.pl> wrote:
>
> U=BFytkownik "Kevin J. McCann" <Kevin.McCann at umbc.edu> napisa=B3 w
> wiadomo=B6ci
> grup dyskusyjnych:iv1a86$sji$1 at smc.vnet.net...
>> 2.0 is not an integer nor a rational, it is machine precision. On the
>> other hand 2 is an integer and exact.
>
> The decimal fraction 2.0 is in mathematics (the science) exactly the
> same as
> the sum 2 + 0/10
>
> The convention that 2.0 is less accurate than 2.00 is applied ONLY in
> Mathematica (the computer program).
>
>
>
>
--
DrMajorBob at yahoo.com
Prev by Date:
Re: Unwanted Recursion
Next by Date:
Re: Unwanted Recursion
Previous by thread:
Re: Numerical accuracy/precision - this is a bug or a feature?
Next by thread:
Re: Numerical accuracy/precision - this is a bug or a feature?
|