looks like a job for an external
2011/12/16 i go bananas <hard....@gmail.com> > actually, i'm not going to do anything more on this. > > i had a look at the articles claude posted, and they went a bit far over > my head. > > my patch will still work for basic things like 1/4 and 7/8, but i wouldn't > depend on it working for a serious application. As you first suggested, > it's not so simple, and if you read claude's articles, you will see that it > isn't. > > it's not brain science though, so maybe someone with a bit more number > understanding can tackle it. > > > > On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres < > por...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > i had a go at it >> >> thanks, I kinda had to go too, but no time... :( >> >> > yeah, my patch only works for rational numbers. >> >> you know what, I think I asked this before on this list, >> >> deja'vu >> >> > will have a look at the article / method you posted, claude. >> >> are you going at it too? :) >> >> by the way, I meant something like 1.75 becomes 7/4 and not 3/4, but that >> is easy to adapt on your patch >> >> thanks >> >> cheers >> >> >> >> 2011/12/16 i go bananas <hard....@gmail.com> >> >>> by the way, here is the method i used: >>> >>> first, convert the decimal part to a fraction in the form of n/100000 >>> next, find the highest common factor of n and 100000 >>> (using the 'division method' like this: >>> http://easycalculation.com/what-is-hcf.php ) >>> >>> then just divide n and 100000 by that factor. >>> >>> actually, that means it's accurate to 6 decimal places, i guess. >>> well...whatever :D >>> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list