Are Floating Point Numbers still a Can of Worms?

[Dennis Lee Bieber]

On Mon, 24 Oct 2022 14:52:28 +0000, "Schachner, Joseph (US)"
<Joseph.Schachner at Teledyne.com> declaimed the following:

>Floating point will always be a can of worms, as long as people expect it to represent real numbers with more precision that float has.  Usually this is not an issue, but sometimes it is.  And, although this example does not exhibit subtractive cancellation, that is the surest way to have less precision that the two values you subtracted.  And if you try to add up lots of values, if your sum grows large enough, tiny values will not change it anymore, even if there are many of them  - there are simple algorithms to avoid this effect.  But all of this is because float has limited precision.
>

	Might I suggest this to those affected...
https://www.amazon.com/Real-Computing-Made-Engineering-Calculations/dp/0486442217/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1666634371&sr=8-1

(Wow -- they want a fortune for the original hard-cover, which I own)


-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
	wlfraed at ix.netcom.com    http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/