[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA*Subject*: Comparing float to rational*From*: Guy Steele <gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA>*Date*: Mon, 27 Jan 86 17:50 EST*Cc*: gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA

I thinm that Fateman has raised a valid issue that deserves discussion. Right now the Common Lisp book does seem to specify quite clearly (page 194) that for comparison as well as "combining" of a rational with a float, the rational shall be converted to a float of the same format. Evidence on the other side of the question is the remark that for MAX and MIN, if the largest (resp. smallest) argument is a rational then the returned result may be a rational even though the argument is a float. I think there is a lot to be said for requiring comparison between a rational and a float always to work and not to overflow. I think there is much less to be said in the case of addition, but I am on less solid ground here. What is FORTRAN's position on this? In FORTRAN when an integer meets a float, the integer gets converted to a float. I can't find my copy of the FORTRAN '77 standard just this minute, but I don't recall anything in the standard requiring the range of a float to be as large as that of an integer (granted that for an integer to exceed the range of a float would be considered unusual in that culture). I also reject the notion that a floating-point number is really an interval (though I'm not sure GJC implied this directly). However, I do think it is reasonable to consider floating-point numbers to be approximations--at least, once the inexact flag gets set. (It seems to me, by the way, that if bits were free it would be more sensible to have an inexact bit in every value rather than a single global flag; but bits are not free and the 754 committee was having to sweat as it was to cram everything into 32 bits.) One strives for a reasonable economic balance between accuracy, speed, and ease of understanding. In the case of comparisons, it is not too difficult to be completely accurate, and doing so makes it much easier to understand. That's as far as I go with confidence. The issue for addition or multiplication is not so clear, because the speed costs are not clear (they can cascade). This is a reasonable matter for discussion. --Guy

**Follow-Ups**:**Comparing float to rational***From:*Robert A. Cassels <Cassels@TENEX.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>

- Prev by Date:
**precision, accuracy, and floating conversion (GJC's comment)** - Next by Date:
**precision, accuracy, and floating conversion (GJC's comment)** - Previous by thread:
**precision, accuracy, and floating conversion (GJC's comment)** - Next by thread:
**Comparing float to rational** - Index(es):