Re: Initializing constants
- From: "newsposter0123" <newsposter0123@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 Aug 2006 12:20:47 -0700
Ben Pfaff wrote:
"newsposter0123" <newsposter0123@xxxxxxxxx> writes:Yep. Some hardware provides an 128bit long double.
Ben Pfaff wrote:
Provided the precision of the measurements device was known in advance,
then the number of significant digits could be predetermined. If a
device with greater precision were used, then the constant would be
require adjustment (and no longer be a constant).
But the i386 floating-point architecture also has a fixed
precision.
When you obtain your device with greater precision,
you will have to change the code anyhow.
Depending on how the application was implemented, maybe. If the
calculations could be completed using the long double type, then no.
But the library/ api providing and/or using the constant would not
require adjustment.
So I don't see theMuch easier for the programmer to implement.
benefit.
BTW, this is off topic, but if a measurment device (micrometer) is
graduated in thousands of an inch and has range 0-2 inch, would the
measurement .053 contain 3 or 4 significant digits and be written as
5.300e-2 or 5.30e-2? I'm pretty sure the measurement 1.053 would have
4.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Initializing constants
- From: Ben Pfaff
- Re: Initializing constants
- References:
- Initializing constants
- From: newsposter0123
- Re: Initializing constants
- From: Ben Pfaff
- Re: Initializing constants
- From: newsposter0123
- Re: Initializing constants
- From: Ben Pfaff
- Initializing constants
- Prev by Date: Re: [newbie] strcpy, strtok and strcat problem...
- Next by Date: Re: Redirection issue
- Previous by thread: Re: Initializing constants
- Next by thread: Re: Initializing constants
- Index(es):