To the author of that message, perhaps it was clear. That it wasn't clear to
Joey means, to me at least, that it wasn't clear to others.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram)
|/\| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|\ | |If you cannot describe what you are doing
BSc(Math) UNBF'83 þas a process, you don't know what you're doing.
Sapere Aude | - W. E. Deming
Natural Born APL'er | Demo website: http://156.34.78.239/
-----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }-
----- Original Message -----
From: "R&S HUI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "General forum" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] significant digits
It seems clear what I disagree with.
----- Original Message -----
From: Joey K Tuttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Saturday, June 24, 2006 5:53 pm
Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] significant digits
Better to fix it? Seems to me the following should produce
the same results ...
'0' 8!:2 ] 365365365365365365x^2
133491850208566945040100911382265856
0": 365365365365365365^2
133491850208566926593356837672714240
You disagree with that?
At 17:10 -0700 2006/06/24, R&S HUI wrote:
> > IMHO, it would be a good idea to include a comment ...
>
>I disagree.
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Joey K Tuttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
>> IMHO, it would be a good idea to include a comment in the 8!:
>> documentation page that expands on the description - "y is
>> usually an array of real numbers." to the effect that extended
> > integers may cause erratic results.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
