Re: galculator should be included in Gnome

[Andrew Sobala <aes gnome org>]

On Sun, 2003-04-27 at 14:20, Simon Floery wrote:
> > Some sort of standard form is very useful, though. Splatting the whole
> > number onto a display is just unwieldy.
> > 
> > How precise is libm? How precise is galculator internally? (Basically,
> > how many sig figs are accurate before weird rounding errors can start to
> > happen?)
> 
> galculator uses double precision throughout its code. double precision means
> an accuracy of 2.22e-16 (15 digits of precision). Naturally, the number of
> significant figures may decrease slightly during an extensive calculation due
> to rounding errors. 
> 

As long as it keeps the "accurate version" in memory when you press =,
that's good enough for most uses, especially since the display only does
12 digits.

> > I'd say this is a very good reason for going with galculator, though it
> > conflicts with Anand Kumria's e-mail. It seems that galculator does know
> > about precedence, but still doesn't work to the "Typing something in as
> > it's written" principle. You have to do things like "1 + 10 log" to get
> > what should really be "1 + log 10". Easy-fix?
> > 
> 
> galculator pays respect to arithmetic precedence. This means it knows the rule
> "braces before multiplication/division before addition/subtraction". Allowing
> "1 + log 10" doesn't make sense with a "number only" display for usability
> reasons. Therefore such calculators apply functions to the current
> display value.
> 
> For "Typing something in as it's written" another display type is required,
> e.g. one that also displays operations and functions and not only numbers.

Good point, I'll stop moaning :-)

-- 
Andrew Sobala <aes gnome org>

"A freudian slip is when you say one thing but you mean your mother." -- unknown