| ??? 02/16/04 14:21 Read: times |
#64862 - RE: floating point numbers Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Sounds logical.
You have N bits available. If you want to increase the range you want to represent, you will lose on accuracy as the "step" size is larger. If you increase the accuracy, the representable range will decrease... regards Patrick |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Michael | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: why floating point numbers? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Lookup Table | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Which rubbish ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 |