From: jzakiya Date: 2009-12-28T14:35:06+09:00 Subject: Re: Trig value errors On Dec 27, 11:50 pm, Seebs wrote: > On 2009-12-28, jzakiya wrote: > > > All I can say is.... > > > Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain. :( > > This adequately summarizes the difficulty people have had getting you to > understand why it is ridiculous to try to "fix" sin(180) but not to try to > "fix" sin(45). > > -s > -- > Copyright 2009, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nos...@seebs.nethttp://www.seebs.net/log/<-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictureshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated! No, YOU still don't seem to know the difference between precision an accuracy. If you can READ I said my method is no more precise, i.e it CANNOT resolve angular differences past the inherent precision of the native trig functions. But what you, and your cohorts, don't want to deal with, is my method IS MORE ACCURATE for sin|cos on the x|y axis angles, whereas the native functions are INACCURATE. So, I DON'T CARE how precise any of the other angles are, because they all are ACCURATE to the precision that the native functions have. I said this many times, and others have tried to explain the difference too. One thing is VERY CLEAR though. YOU, can't SHOW that my method is inaccurate for any angle value. Can YOU? Ah... A Brain is such a terrible thing to waste. :(