It's well-known that floats can't be treated the same way as integers... but since PD is aimed at non-engineers and non-scientists I think it would be a good idea to implement the "good" comparison algorithms (i.e. checking against a threshold, etc) inside [==] and so, just to make patching easier. Maybe it's already supposed to behave this way...<br>
<br> As for the loss of integer precision issue, an object that detects "integer overflow" (that is, when all integer digits of the number cannot be represented) could be created, taking into account the floating point precision (32-bit, 64-bit...) and so.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">2012/3/9 Mathieu Bouchard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:matju@artengine.ca">matju@artengine.ca</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Le 2012-03-09 à 09:39:00, Charles Henry a écrit :<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Martin a écrit :<div class="im"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
For any floatX unless X is infinity the number of floats that are not<br>
exactly represented is always infinite.<br>
</blockquote></div></blockquote>
<br>
For a floatX format where X is the number of bits, every float is exact and there are at most pow(2,X) floats.<br>
<br>
You mean that there are an infinity of numbers that round to a finite number of floats.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
There is a countably infinite number of rational numbers and a uncountably infinite number of irrational numbers that cannot be represented.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>