[Issue 3248] lossless floating point formatting
d-bugmail at puremagic.com
d-bugmail at puremagic.com
Mon Sep 7 04:25:40 PDT 2009
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3248
--- Comment #9 from Don <clugdbug at yahoo.com.au> 2009-09-07 04:25:35 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > As far as I understand it, removing trailing zeros from .8 precision and (c)
> > are the same.
>
> I doubt it ... I think the optimal number of decimal s.f. would depend on the
> binary exponent. But I'll experiment when I have time.
You are correct. Some numbers need an extra digit.
> > I remember .dig being 6 for all floats (could be wrong here, not close to any
> > dmd.exe)
>
> The spec describes .dig as "number of decimal digits of precision", which seems
> ambiguous. Is it a property of the type or the value?
It's a property of the type.
If it's a type
> property, is it the maximum number of s.f. that may be required to express a
> number of the type unambiguously, or the number of s.f. to which numbers are
> guaranteed to be storeable unambiguously?
Neither. It's the number of sic figs which are accurate in the worst case. So
it's the _minimum_ number of digits which are stored. To unambiguously define
the number, more digits are almost always required.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
More information about the Digitalmars-d-bugs
mailing list