From: Kero van Gelder <kero@...4050.upc-d.chello.nl>
Date: 2001-07-30T05:40:09+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:18757] Re: Numbers classes.. Rational number? [was: Ruby as opposed to Python?]

> > 12345678901234567890 / 1.0  => 1.23456789e+19
> > 
> > which actually looses accuracy, by automatically converting to float,
> > instead of BigNum. This would be an argument to drop automatic
> > conversion for floats. You could still convert automatically with
> > Numerics and Rationals, since you loose nothing (and should expect a
> > Rational anyway).
> 
> Of course, the number 1.0 is imprecise so you don't loose accuracy. What 
> you seem to propose is rather than to convert '12345678901234567890'
> to a float is to convert '1.0' to a Fixnum or Bignum, making the result 
> look more accurate than it really is (The 1.0 could of course be the 
> result of some float, i.e. inaccurate, computation).

No, I argued against any automatic conversion at all. But that is
inconvenient, so matz will never do that.

You are right about the 1.0 having no accuracy when it is a result; I
suggested it as clear-cut one, where the Biggie was a result. Hm.. Not
good :(

> In my opinion Rational results should be an option rather 
> than glued into the language, as many computations involve irrational 
> numbers, too.

My iPAQ has no FPU, but I can not choose not to incorporate floats
into Ruby :)

Point taken and agreed to. As I understood in this thread, rationals
are already in the default extensions: require 'rational'

+--- Kero ------------------------------ kero@chello.nl ---+
|  Don't split your mentality without thinking twice       |
|                          Proud like a God -- Guano Apes  |
+--- M38c ------- http://members.chello.nl/~k.vangelder ---+