Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> From: "Christian Tismer" <tismer@tismer.com>
>
>>>Greg> The problem as I see it is not the magnitude of the number, but
>>>Greg> that the number of significant bits grows without bound, if you
>>>Greg> never throw any of them away.
>>>
>>>So I'm suggesting that maybe it won't get bad as quickly if
>>>you keep only the significant bits :-)
>>
>>Yes. And this is what a rounding to float would do for you.
>
>
> That is unless you wanted more precision than comes with a float.
> Normalization to some arbitrary maximum denominator magnitude
> would be a more general purpose solution.
Sure, this is right.
So rationals are seriously considered? Would be great.
ciao - chris
--
Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer@tismer.com>
Mission Impossible 5oftware : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9a : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14109 Berlin : PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
work +49 30 89 09 53 34 home +49 30 802 86 56 pager +49 173 24 18 776
PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/
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