OpenEuphoria

Re: New proposal for math.e

• Posted by Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyo?der.co.uk> Aug 04, 2007
• 526 views

Juergen Luethje wrote:
> 
> > >    E          = machine_func(47, {105,87,20,139,10,191,5,64}),    --
> > >    2.7182818284590452e0
> > >    PI         = machine_func(47, {24,45,68,84,251,33,9,64}),      --
> > >    3.1415926535897932e0
Oh, I wasn't paying attention. There is an old thread which maybe should be
revisited:
http://www.openeuphoria.org/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?thread=1&fromMonth=4&fromYear=B&toMonth=6&toYear=B&keywords=%22Number+Stability+With+Decimals%22

In summary, a tweak to the way value(), and eu.ex, load numbers might mean that
this is not necessary.

FWIW, if this "trick" is needed, I'd prefer to see:

constant
E  = float64_to_atom({#69,#57,#14,#8B,#0A,#BF,#05,#40}), --(ie 2.7182...)
PI = float64_to_atom({#18,#2D,#44,#54,#FB,#21,#09,#40}), --(ie 3.1415...)

(I am a bit allergic to machine_func(47 etc, but it is not life-threatening)

If after that, PI/2 is not as accurate as it sh/could be, then something is
seriously wrong.

Regards,
Pete