Re: Big integer atoms
> This "up to about 15 decimal digits" seems to be not
> enough concrete thing for some cases.
>
> Couldn't someone tell me about more precise
> bounds of these "larger integer values"?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Igor Kachan
> kinz at peterlink.ru
>
When using doubles to store numbers (that's what Eu atoms physically are), 53
out of the 64 available bits hold numerical info. The remainder is
for (biased) exponent and sign. This holds true on both Intel and m68k chips.
2^53 uses 15 or 16 decimal places to be written. This means that
integer computations with 15 decimal digits can still be done without
precision loss using atoms. At 16, you may encounter rounding off errors, and
there will be some at 17 and beyond quite definitely. I say "may" because of
the implied leading 1 in the mantissa, which gives you a little more leeway.
Extended floats are more hardware specific, so that Eu can't easily
support them. And it would extend the no accuracy loss range to 18 digits
only.
Regards.
CChris
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
