[Kevin Jacobs]
#- >[Jewett, Jim J]
#- >#- Under the current implementation:
#- >#- (0, (2, 4, 0, 0, 0), -4)
#- >#- is not quite the same as
#- >#- (0, (2, 4) -1)
#- >#- Given this, is should be possible for the user to specify
#- >#- (at creation) which is desired.
#- >
#- >It *is* posible:
#- >
#- >>>>Decimal('2.4000')
#- >Decimal( (0, (2, 4, 0, 0, 0), -4) )
#- >
#- >>>>Decimal('2.4')
#- >Decimal( (0, (2, 4), -1) )
#- >
#-
#- <sarcasm>Great!</sarcasm>. One of my previous posts
#- specifically listed
#- that I didn't want to have to pre-parse and reformulate
#- string literals to
#- achieve the desired precision and scale. The "external"
<lost> what? </lost> :p
I still don't understand why do you want that.
#- >If you construct using precision, and the precision is
#- smaller than the
#- >quantity of digits you provide, you'll get rounded, but if
#- the precision is
#- >greater than the quantity of digits you provide, you don't
#- get filled with
#- >zeros.
#-
#- Rounding is exactly what should be done if one exceeds the desired
#- precision. Using
#- less that the desired precision (i.e., not filling in zeros)
#- may be okay
#- for many applications.
#- This is because any operations on the value will have to be
#- performed
#- with the precision
#- defined in the decimal context. Thus, the results will be
#- identical,
#- other than that the
#- Decimal instance may not store the maximum precision
#- available by the
#- schema.
If I don't misunderstand, you're saying that store additional zeroes is
important to your future operations?
Let's make an example.
If I have '2.4000', I go into decimal and get:
>>>Decimal('2.4000')
Decimal( (0, (2, 4, 0, 0, 0), -4) )
If I have '2.4', I go into decimal and get:
>>>Decimal('2.4')
Decimal( (0, (2, 4), -1) )
Are you trying to say that you want Decimal to fill up that number with
zeroes...
>>>Decimal('2.4', scale=4) # behaviour don't intended, just an example
Decimal( (0, (2, 4, 0, 0, 0), -4) )
...just to represent that you have that precision in your measurements and
reflect that in future arithmetic operations?
If yes, I think that: a) '2.4' and '2.4000' will behaviour identically in
future operations; b) why do you need to represent in the number the
precision of your measurement?
. Facundo
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