On Mon, 2017-04-10 at 12:17 -0700, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> […]
>
> There is no BigFloat in phobos, you could try looking at
> code.dlang.org
> to see if there's anything that you could use.
>
[…]
Isn't the way forward here just to wrap GMP:
https://code.
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 06:54:54PM +, Geroge Little via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> Is there support for BigFloat in phobos or any other package? I was
> playing around with D and wrote some code that calculates a Fibonacci
> sequence (iterative) with overflow detection that upgra
Is there support for BigFloat in phobos or any other package? I
was playing around with D and wrote some code that calculates a
Fibonacci sequence (iterative) with overflow detection that
upgrades ulong to BigInt. I also wanted to use Binet's formula
which requires sqrt(5) but it only works up
On Tuesday, 17 February 2015 at 14:03:45 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 17 February 2015 at 09:08:17 UTC, Vlad Levenfeld
wrote:
For my use case I'm less concerned with absolute resolution
than with preserving the information in the smaller operand
when dealing with large magnitude
On Tuesday, 17 February 2015 at 09:08:17 UTC, Vlad Levenfeld
wrote:
On Tuesday, 17 February 2015 at 08:05:49 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
Periodic fractions.
Or transcendental numbers, for that matter, but arbitrary !=
infinite. A max_expansion template parameter could be useful
here.
For my use
On Tuesday, 17 February 2015 at 09:08:17 UTC, Vlad Levenfeld
wrote:
For my use case I'm less concerned with absolute resolution
than with preserving the information in the smaller operand
when dealing with large magnitude differences.
What do you mean? As long as you don't change the operand,
Periodic fractions.
On Tuesday, 17 February 2015 at 08:05:49 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
Periodic fractions.
Or transcendental numbers, for that matter, but arbitrary !=
infinite. A max_expansion template parameter could be useful here.
For my use case I'm less concerned with absolute resolution than
with preserving
We've got arbitrary precision integers, why not arbitrary
precision floating point?
