On Saturday 25 January 2003 14:54, Anton Ertl wrote: > > There's a reason to prefer the first version. Sometimes you > > want an accurate decimal representation of a radix 2, 64-bit > > floating point number considered as exact. > > This gives very long numbers for small numbers; I would guess around > 700 digits in exponential notation and 1000 in plain notation.
Generally, you should not considder FP numbers as exact representation, but as interval of value+-eps/2. Therefore I think it's ok for ecvt() to stop when there's only one FP representation for this number, i.e. conversion is clear in both ways. Our own ecvt() is just a quick and dirty hack for DOS, where no C version was available, and AFAIK not used anymore. It should still have a bug we once discovered, and while I promised to replace it with the glibc version, we found out that we don't need it anymore. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
