Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop

[Richard Zidlicky]

On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 10:41:31AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> > ...an irrational number is defined to be any number not
> > representable as the ratio of two integers.
> 
> I know that definition, but isn't an infinite number of decimal (or 
> binary) places what you end up with as a result?
> 
> I accept that 1/3 is not irrational - I am guilty of using the term 
> inaccurately - but it is still one of those values that cannot be 
> represented exactly in a limited precision number system such as that 
> on the QL, and other computers - allegedly :)

try some other base than the boring 2:)

Btw do you consider 0.2 irrational? Try to represent it in binary.

Bye
Richard