If you want to print the numbers nicely to the console add [makefilename
%f] :
[t b f]
|
[makefilename %f]
|
[print count]
Be aware of https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/issues/812
:)
Mensaje telepatico asistido por maquinas.
On 9/18/2020 6:12 PM, hans w. koch wrote:
hello,
its probably due to my lack of understanding the correct number
representations, but here it goes anyway:
i compiled pd 51-2 double precision for mac 10.14.6
with this version i was hoping to do some maths on big numbers.
but already an increment of 1 on some moderatly big number gives me
problems of representation.
i made a simple version of the problem as a patch.
to verify you have a working version of pd double, it contains a
simple test.
and then an iterative addition +1 starting from 999999.
i get this:
count: 999999
count: 1e+06
count: 1e+06
count: 1e+06
count: 1e+06
count: 1e+06
count: 1.00000e+06
count: 1.00001e+06
count: 1.00001e+06
count: 1.00001e+06
the algorith terminates succesfully by a [select] after 10 iterations,
but the results don´t show what i expect.
this to me indicates, that the internal numbers are correct, but they
don´t “surface” as such.
i would be grateful for any pointers and possible workarounds, as the
numbers i hope to be dealing with are potentially orders of magnitude
higher.
thanks hans
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
<https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list>
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
