All of which makes me glad that I rarely need the accuracy beyond 53-bits and when I do, 64-bit ints suffice.
This is why I prefer to keep things as rationals (or bigrats), rather than floats - it's possible to represent them accurately without encountering the inevitable rounding or truncating errors. True, all the irrational numbers will still truncate, but the rationals won't. I only use the decimal representation for display purposes, sometimes.
In reply to Re^4: Help me make a test case for Math::BigFloat
by spiritway
in thread Help me make a test case for Math::BigFloat
by fizbin
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |