From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tristan Plumb <9p-st@imu.li>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <2576e4.40c323e4.IOOu.mx@tumtum.plumbweb.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:54:33 -0500
User-Agent: mx-alpha
Subject: [9fans] printing floating point numbers
Topicbox-Message-UUID: e72f7ae0-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

I'm working on (re)writing some utilies for geospatial work on Plan9,
there are lots of floating point numbers (a file outlining the USGS
quadrangles for the state of Maine has about 60k). With the current
implementation this takes a long time. Maybe I should switch to a binary
format (but that's part of what I'm trying to get away from!).

Basically, do folks consider it possible to improve speed while keeping
or increasing the precision? A very simple implementation is accurate to
~15 digits, the current one is to 18 digits (though there are some
rounding errors).

In ways it would be nice to print stored numbers exactly. Yet numbers
like 2⁻¹⁰²²+2⁻¹⁰⁷⁴ (767 digits) are stored exactly...

2.2250738585072018771558785585789482407880088486837041956131300312119688603996006965297904292212628858639037013670281908017171296072711910355127227413175152199055740043138804567803233377539881639177387328959246074229270113078053813397081653361296447449529789521218979090783852583365901851789618799885150427514782636076021680436220311292700454832073964845713103912225963935608322440623896907276890186717054549275173986589324810401738228328251245795065655738191038008646911615828719989708647293221449796971546706720399791990809160347625980385995424739847678861180095072511543762389603716215171729816011544604359531284325406441938645324905389137795680915804792405099227413854274942620542640408839836919187418172987793340279242767544565229087538682506419718265533447265625e-308

The current implementation just prints the first 18 digits.

Thoughts?
Tristan

--
All original matter is hereby placed immediately under the public domain.