2009/8/13 <[email protected]>: > Em 12/08/2009 19:30, Igor Stasenko < [email protected] > escreveu: > >> 2009/8/12 Ken.Dickey : >> > "Schwab,Wilhelm K" >> >> Floating point is not always what it seems. >> > >> > Hence my comment that IEEE floats get "the wrong answer fast". I have used >> > interval math, continued fractions, and linear fractional transforms >> > (a.k.a. >> > exact reals). I agree that each representation has its challenges. >> > >> > Let's talk for a second about integers. >> > >> > 0 = (0+0i) --> true >> > 1 = (1+0i) --> true >> > 0 < 1 --> true >> > (0+0i) < (1+0i) --> ?? which answer here gives me the least surprise ?? >> > >> > To put it another way >> > >> > (A = a) --> true >> > (B = b) --> true >> > (A < B) --> true >> > (a < b) --> ?? what do you expect to see here ?? >> > >> >> Let me extend your test a little >> >> i do expect that, if : >> >> a < b >> >> and >> >> 0 < x >> >> then >> >> a*x < b*x > > Your "counter example" is mathematically flawed even in Real (non imaginary): > > let a = 1; b = 2 and x = -1: > do you intentionally missed the condition 0 < x?
> a < b and a*x > b*x > > So there isn't this kind of transitivity for inequality operators at all. > > [snipped] > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
