Mark Dickinson wrote: > But the Fraction type is going to mess this up: for Decimal + > Fraction -> Decimal, I don't see any other sensible option than to > convert the Fraction using the current context, since lossless > conversion isn't generally possible. You could convert the Decimal to a Fraction, do the arithmetic as Fractions, and convert the result back to Decimal using the current precision. I think this would satisfy the principle of performing the calculation as though infinite precision were available, and the final rounding is justified, since seen from the outside we are performing a single operation on two numbers. Another approach would be to convert the numerators and denominators separately to Decimal, and then do a/b + c/d = (a*d + b*c) / (b*d) using the usual rules of Decimal arithmetic. This would incur more than one rounding, but the rules for Decimals concern operations between two Decimals, and we have a Decimal and a Fraction here, so all bets could be considered off. -- Greg
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4