Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow()
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1381.1447448425@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow() (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow()
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
BTW, something I find confusing and error-prone is that this patch keeps on using the term "weight" to refer to numbers expressed in decimal digits (ie, the approximate log10 of something). Basically everywhere in the existing code, "weights" are measured in base-NBASE digits, while "scales" are measured in decimal digits. I've not yet come across anyplace where you got the units wrong, but it seems like a gotcha waiting to bite the next hacker. I thought for a bit about s/weight/scale/g in the patch, but that is not le mot juste either, since weight is generally counting digits to the left of the decimal point while scale is generally counting digits to the right. The best idea that has come to me is to use "dweight" to refer to a weight measured in decimal digits. Anyone have a better thought? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: