Re: Numeric leak
From: James Giles (jamesgiles_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 08/28/04
- Next message: James Giles: "Re: Another PL/I cant"
- Previous message: Jan Hengeveld: "Re: How many years we have been programming in Fortran"
- In reply to: glen herrmannsfeldt: "Re: Numeric leak"
- Next in thread: Steve Lionel: "Re: Numeric leak"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:17:36 GMT
glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
...
> It is nice to have the ability to write a value to disk or
> tape, and get the same value back, but it is also nice to have
> them easy to read by people.
As I said before, I don't find the actual numbers particularly
harder to read than the prematurely rounded fictional numbers.
And, if I see a list of numbers that have been generated and then,
say, plot a histogram of them, if the numbers were presented
accurately, I don't get "impossible" results (like, "I *saw*
5.0 in the list of values, but the bin from 5 to 6 is empty.")
That's just one of the cases where the correct number *is*
easier to read - even to humans.
-- J. Giles "I conclude that there are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies." -- C. A. R. Hoare
- Next message: James Giles: "Re: Another PL/I cant"
- Previous message: Jan Hengeveld: "Re: How many years we have been programming in Fortran"
- In reply to: glen herrmannsfeldt: "Re: Numeric leak"
- Next in thread: Steve Lionel: "Re: Numeric leak"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
Loading