* Michael Jones <michael.jo...@gmail.com> [180430 13:54]: > Andrey, that's great! > > On the Fibonacci series evaluation, let's make sure that we're all doing > the same calculation. For completeness and safety, let's skip all library > values and derived values. Here are more-than-sufficient versions of the > three constants in Yuval's code:
I think both of you missed the point of my message. This has nothing to do specifically with Fibonacci numbers. The problem is simply that math.Pow does not give as precise answers as the C++ std lib. Look at https://play.golang.org/p/_gVbAWjeoyW and notice that the result from math.Pow is off in the 15th decimal digit. Both the bigPow and the C++ pow library function are good until the 17th digit, which is what is expected. (Actually, I thought bigPow might do better, with the specified precision of 300.) I trust the Mathematica answer to be correct to the number of digits printed (last digit rounded). There is no math.Phi involved here, except that the hand-typed constant happens to be as close as you can get to Phi in a float64 (but this is not relevant to the test). ...Marvin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
