Re: n accuracy
- From: Edi Weitz <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 09:26:35 +0200
On 30 May 2007 00:19:57 -0700, fireblade <slobodan.blazeski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yesterday I was lisping some statistics so I needed e, considering I
couldn't find it at hyperspec (too much coffein I guess) so I used
(exp 1) => 2.7182818 but author of the stat book seemed to have
different idea about some digits.
This looks like the correct approximation for 8 digits to me. If the
author of your book thinks that some of the digits should be
different, then maybe you need another book.
If you need more digits, try (EXP 1D0).
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq "spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxx" 5) "edi")
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: n accuracy
- From: Alex Mizrahi
- Re: n accuracy
- References:
- n accuracy
- From: fireblade
- n accuracy
- Prev by Date: n accuracy
- Next by Date: Re: n accuracy
- Previous by thread: n accuracy
- Next by thread: Re: n accuracy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
