Dan Sugalski wrote:
> While it may not be correct, at least it's exact. If we go with an inexact
> representation, we run the risk of accumulating errors and eventually
> ending up with a number that's both inexact and incorrect.
>
> Dan Sugalski the even samurai
Why not introduce "precision" in a chemistry (or engineering?) sense
to our language? Precision is widely misunderstood in computer circles.
What if the generic perl6 floating point datum gets not only an
exponent and a mantissa, but an exponent, a mantissa, and a precision?
Those who need incredible precision could crank it up, those who need
correct precision would have it (provided all their tools are precision-compliant)
--
David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On hold for tech support since 1995
