Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: st: rounding the minimum of a negative number
From
annoporci <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: rounding the minimum of a negative number
Date
Thu, 10 Jan 2013 22:19:36 +0800
Thanks Nick for these precisions.
If you want _display_ to a fixed number of decimal places, that is
ultimately a question of formatting and not a problem of numerics.
Yes. I guess another way of expressing my puzzlement is that Stata does
not display, by default, to a greater number of decimal places.
I don't know anything about this, but in Python, for instance, according
to the documentation: "On a typical machine running Python, there are 53
bits of precision available for a Python float." And, to quote more:
If Python were to print the true decimal value of the binary approximation
stored for 0.1, it would have to display:
0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625
So that's still quite a few zeros after the first 1. And if Stata had
displayed something like
-1.980000009999
for 1.9810, I would not have been puzzled.
I do have one last question and then I'll consider the matter closed:
Would I get a more accurate approximation of "-1.981" with Stata if I
input "-1.981000000001" than if I input "-1.981" ? in the sense that it
would "force" Stata to store the zeros after 981? (or am I
misunderstanding the whole issue?)
Thanks Nick,
--
Patrick Toche.
References:
http://docs.python.org/2/tutorial/floatingpoint.html
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 20:15:45 +0800, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
I don't think that is a clear specification of what Stata is doing (it
doesn't "make up its own digits") or of what it should, in your view,
do instead.
If you want _display_ to a fixed number of decimal places, that is
ultimately a question of formatting and not a problem of numerics.
That is,
display %3.2 f 1 + 98/100
will ensure that you see "1.98" and this last step is in essence
string manipulation with numeric characters. But all that is done by
(e.g.)
scalar foo = 1.98
is putting a binary approximation of 1.98 in a scalar. Adding bits
will change the accuracy of the approximation (only).
Nick
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/