On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 19:24:24 GMT, Joe Darcy <da...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Add discussion of some of the common pitfalls related to decimal <-> binary
>> conversion.
>
> Joe Darcy has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Switch to parseFloat from valueOf, add links.
Left some minor proofreading comments. (Not a Reviewer)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Double.java line 209:
> 207: * decimal conversion. While integer values can be exactly represented
> 208: * in any base, which fractional values can be exactly represented is
> 209: * a function of the base. For example, in base 10, 1/3 is a repeating
Could the first sentence be simplified and "de-aspectized"? Suggestion:
"..trace back to conversions between binary and decimal representations".
The second sentence has a suspicious while/which pairing and "represented is"
should probably be "represented as". Suggestion: "While integer values can be
exactly represented in any base, fractional values can only be exactly
represented as a function of the base."
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Double.java line 243:
> 241: * double}. Alternatives include using an integer type and storing
> 242: * cents or mills or using {@link java.math.BigDecimal BigDecimal} to
> 243: * store decimal fraction values exactly.
The use of and/or here makes this sentence somewhat hard to parse. Perhaps a
bit of punctuation could help readability?
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Double.java line 246:
> 244: *
> 245: * <p>For each finite floating-point value and a given floating-point
> 246: * type, there is a contiguous region of the real number line which
Neither English nor floating-point are native to me, but would it be better to
use "region on the real number line" here?
A quick Google search of the alternatives gives 4 results for "region of.." and
22.000 for "region on.."
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Double.java line 275:
> 273: * }
> 274: *
> 275: * <p>An analogous range can be constructed similarly for the {@code
Suggestion:
* <p>Similarly, an analogous range can be constructed for the {@code
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Double.java line 289:
> 287: * </ul>
> 288: *
> 289: * A floating-point value doesn't "know" if it was the result of
Would it be better to use "whether" in this listing of alternatives? (As
recommended by Merriam-Webster:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/if-vs-whether-difference-usage)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Double.java line 305:
> 303: *
> 304: * should <em>not</em> be expected to be exactly equal to 1.0, but
> 305: * only close to 1.0. Consequently the following code is an infinite
> loop:
I think "Consequently" is a conjunctive adverb here, so should be followed by a
comma. Or perhaps just drop it, since the previous sentence also starts with
"Consequently, "
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Double.java line 314:
> 312: * }
> 313: *
> 314: * Instead, for counted loops, use an integer loop count:
Suggestion:
* Instead, use integer loop counters for counted loops:
-------------
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16566#pullrequestreview-1721041731
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16566#discussion_r1387055262
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16566#discussion_r1387060390
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16566#discussion_r1387063710
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16566#discussion_r1387092563
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16566#discussion_r1387077414
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16566#discussion_r1387086007
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16566#discussion_r1387097101
