> There are a lot of numbers (approximately 2^64) which
> can be represented precicely in a double. Of course, compared to the
> infinity of real numbers, that's not much, but it is a lot more than can
> can be represented precicely in an integer.

I hate to point out the obvious, but a double float can only exactly
represent the same number of values as a double integer (they're both
64-bit) :) Though your other points were very informative, thanks.

> > floating points suffer from a variable accuracy. so the bigger the
> > number the bigger the errors.
>
> The conclusion is true, but I'd say this is because the accuracy is
> constant, not variable (i.e., it is always about 16 decimal places,
> whether you use small or large numbers).

I must confess I've never really got the hang of raising numbers to an
exponent, despite having a maths degree ;)

--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com

Post a reply to this message