X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Subject:	Re: Precision of doubles and stdio
From:	Jim Easton <jim AT cs DOT ualberta DOT ca>
To:	bagnara AT cs DOT unipr DOT it
Date:	Tue, 7 Mar 2006 04:04:14 -0700 (MST)
CC:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, Jim Easton <jim AT cs DOT ualberta DOT ca>
Message-Id:	<S557632AbWCGLEO/20060307110415Z+117@sunkay.cs.ualberta.ca>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

> Roberto Bagnara wrote: 
> ...
> > $ a.out
> > 70.9
> > 70.900000000000005684341886080801486968994140625
> ...
> > $ ./a.exe
> > 70.9
> > 70.90000000000000568434188608080148696899414
...
> 
Jim Easton wrote:
> With all due respect, why would you want to?  With double you are
> guaranteed only 16 or so digits - the rest is noise.
> 
> 	Jim

 
Roberto Bagnara wrote:

> Dear Jim,
> 
> what is and what is not noise depends on the application.
> In our applications we systematically use controlled rounding
> on IEEE 754 floating point numbers.  In the end, what we obtain
> (in memory) are definite (i.e., provably correct) lower or upper
> bounds of some quantities.
...
> 
> Notice also that any IEEE 754 number can be (exactly!) printed
> with a finite number of decimal digits.  Finally, notice that
> writing an algorithm to print them correctly is not rocket science.
> Hence my astonishment when Tim showed me that the C standard
> decided, instead, to allow blatant violations of the principle
> of least astonishment :-)
> All the best,
> 
> Roberto


Dear Mr. Bagnara,

I see, or at least I think I understand.

Most physicists, engineers, chemists etc. are interested in the most
significant digits not the least.  I don't think I need to try to
explain why.

Thanks for the explanation.

To put this back in the realm of cygwin.com might I suggest that
since having the exact value is important that you should write
your own conversion routine thus not be subject to the vagaries
of various systems.  :-)

No offense intended.

	Jim


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -