Re^4: Which "use" statements in a module do "bubble up" to the callers?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Which "use" statements in a module do "bubble up" to the callers? by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Aug 31, 2017 at 16:48 UTC
... 22/7 is ... slightly better ... but 4atan2(1,1) is much better.* And my favorite, 355/113, "slide-rule pi", is right in between the two! Give a man a fish: `<%-{-{-{-<`	[reply] [d/l]
Re^6: Which "use" statements in a module do "bubble up" to the callers? by BillKSmith (Monsignor) on Sep 01, 2017 at 16:33 UTC
Even better: Use M_PI from POSIX instead of PI. Oops, that does not illustrate the scope problem. Bill	[reply]
Re^7: Which "use" statements in a module do "bubble up" to the callers? by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Sep 01, 2017 at 17:25 UTC
I had a vague recollection of a 4-digit/4-digit pi rational approximation that was better than 355/113, but a quick search of the Interwebs shows the next (slightly) better approximations come with 5-digit/5-digit ratios. I must have been thinking of some other rat-app. Give a man a fish: `<%-{-{-{-<`	[reply] [d/l]
Re^8: Which "use" statements in a module do "bubble up" to the callers? (way OT) by Anonymous Monk on Sep 01, 2017 at 17:56 UTC
Re^7: Which "use" statements in a module do "bubble up" to the callers? by Anonymous Monk on Sep 01, 2017 at 16:50 UTC
Remember kids, always get the value of π from the same source. That way, if it changes, you won't have to hunt for it all over the place!	[reply]