Anonymous user
Talk:Increment a numerical string: Difference between revisions
m
→comments on language comparisons: added whitespace.
m (→comments on language comparisons: corrected spelling of "truncation".) |
m (→comments on language comparisons: added whitespace.) |
||
Line 21:
Your investigation of ''the situation'' would most likely be more germane in a study (task) of what happens when an arithmetic operation (such as integer addition) causes an imprecise (or wrong-appearing) result due to insufficient precision (or scale), and may result in ''rounding'' (or ''truncation'' may be the better word choice in this instance), or the increment (or whatever) is so small that the arithmetic operation is ineffective because of lack of magnitude. In any case, I believe your investigative results are beyond the scope of this task's requirements which is about ''incrementing a numerical string''.
Perhaps someone will create a RC task to try to determine the efficacy of various language's mathematical operations.
* underflow▼
On point could/would be:
* overflow▼
▲::* underflow
* rounding▼
▲::* overflow
* loss-of-digits▼
▲::* rounding
* changing the number's format▼
▲::* loss-of-digits
* changing the exponent indicator ('''E''' or '''e''' or '''D''' or '''Q''' ...)▼
▲::* changing the number's format
* form of exponentiation (engineering/scientific/other)▼
▲::* changing the exponent indicator ('''E''' or '''e''' or '''D''' or '''Q''' ...)
* normalization▼
▲::* form of exponentiation (engineering/scientific/other)
* scaling▼
▲::* normalization
▲::* scaling
* trailing zeroes▼
::* leading
::* trailing
::*
* superfluous signs▼
::* imbedded blanks
* etc. ▼
▲::* superfluous signs
▲::* etc.
Many languages don't have this problem as almost all languages don't store numbers as strings (as REXX does).
| |||