on floating-point numbers

[Chris Angelico]

On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 12:55 PM Hope Rouselle <hrouselle at jevedi.com> wrote:
>
> Julio Di Egidio <julio at diegidio.name> writes:
>
> > On Thursday, 2 September 2021 at 16:51:24 UTC+2, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> >> Am 02.09.21 um 16:49 schrieb Julio Di Egidio:
> >> > On Thursday, 2 September 2021 at 16:41:38 UTC+2, Peter Pearson wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, 02 Sep 2021 10:51:03 -0300, Hope Rouselle wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>> 39.60000000000001
> >> >>
> >> >> Welcome to the exciting world of roundoff error:
> >> >
> >> > Welcome to the exiting world of Usenet.
> >> >
> >> > *Plonk*
> >>
> >> Pretty harsh, isn't it? He gave a concise example of the same inaccuracy
> >> right afterwards.
> >
> > And I thought you were not seeing my posts...
> >
> > Given that I have already given a full explanation, you guys, that you
> > realise it or not, are simply adding noise for the usual pub-level
> > discussion I must most charitably guess.
> >
> > Anyway, just my opinion.  (EOD.)
>
> Which is certainly appreciated --- as a rule.  Pub-level noise is pretty
> much unavoidable in investigation, education.  Being wrong is, too,
> unavoidable in investigation, education.  There is a point we eventually
> publish at the most respected journals, but that's a whole other
> interval of the time-line.  IOW, chill out! :-D (Give us a C-k and meet
> us up in the next thread.  Oh, my, you're not a Gnus user: you are a
> G2/1.0 user.  That's pretty scary.)
>

I'm not a fan of the noise level in a pub, but I have absolutely no
problem with arguing these points out. And everyone (mostly) in this
thread is being respectful. I don't mind when someone else is wrong,
especially since - a lot of the time - I'm wrong too (or maybe I'm the
only one who's wrong).

ChrisA