John Darrington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > An issue which arose yesterday when I was trying to use pspp in my > work: > > It seems that many procedures output their results with a fixed > precision. I happened to need a greater precision than PSPP was > displaying. > > The relevant section of pspp code (which I wrote) uses tab_float with > a literal interger for its W and D parameters. Perhaps it should have > used tab_value, and passed the variable's print member to FMT_SPEC ; > the problem is, in that particular routine, the variable is out of > scope (however see below!). > > A quick browse through the code of other procedures shows that there > are perhaps quite a lot of places where this problem has crept in. > Perhaps we should do an audit of these sometime --- although I'd have > to think hard about the general problem to know what the correct > precision and width should be an all cases. For example, given a > bunch of integers, it might be necessary to know the mean value with > better than integer precision ... > > Maybe it'd be better to modify tab_float so that the sentinel value > -1, displays values with variable precision ? ie using %g.
What I really want to do in the end is to make PSPP produce its output in a machine-readable format, such as HDF5, and then derive human-readable output from that using translators. Then it's trivial to get whatever precision you want/need: just extract the "double" value from the machine-readable output. In the short term, we'd need something else, of course. I don't have a great idea, off-hand. -- Ben Pfaff email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://benpfaff.org _______________________________________________ pspp-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-dev
