9 Mar
2012
9 Mar
'12
12:03 a.m.
Le 2012-03-08 à 11:47:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :
From: Roman Haefeli reduzent@gmail.com That's a good example of the implications inherent in floats. What you call a work-around is actually the correct solution. When counting, make sure you count with something that can precisely represented by floats, otherwise the error will grow with each iteration. Integers up to 1.6*10^7 meet that criterion.
Is this still an issue when float precision is 64-bit?
in float32 you have 24 significant bits. in float64 you have 53 significant bits.
This means that the limit is pushed back from 16777216 to 9007199254740992 instead.
| Mathieu BOUCHARD ----- téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 ----- Montréal, QC