Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Raymond Toy <toy.raymond@xxxxxxxxx>
 Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 11:31:31 0400
"Barry" == Barry Margolin <barmar@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Barry> In article
>> > What makes you think the origial 2.0 and 3.0 are exact? They
>> > came from
>>
>> On the other hand, what makes you think they weren't exact?
>> Any epsilon you want to ascribe is outside of the computation.
Barry> When using transcendental functions, exact numbers are
Barry> extremely rare. Except for special cases, all their
Barry> results are irrational, so the floating point value will be
Barry> an approximation.
Certainly, but saying the result of a transcendental function is a
floatingpoint approximation doesn't give you freedom to return any
value. There's a certain expectation that some care is taken and the
value is as close to the true value as reasonably possible.
Perhaps I'm being unreasonable. :)
I agree that the spec doesn't explicitly say what the accuracy of
(expt 2 #c(2d0 1d0)) should be. It would be nice if the more
accurate value were returned, since that doesn't violate the spec,
AFAICT.
Ray
.
 FollowUps:
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: vanekl
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 References:
 (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Raymond Toy
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Barry Margolin
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Raymond Toy
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Captain Obvious
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Raymond Toy
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Captain Obvious
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Raymond Toy
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Barry Margolin
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Raymond Toy
 Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 From: Barry Margolin
 (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 Prev by Date: Re: A Collections Framework?
 Next by Date: Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 Previous by thread: Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 Next by thread: Re: (expt 2 #c(2d0 0))?
 Index(es):
Relevant Pages
