Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!panda!genrad!decvax!tektronix!tekcrl!vice!tekfdi!videovax!stever
From: stever@videovax.Tek.COM (Steven E. Rice, P.E.)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Is .2 irrational?
Message-ID: <4153@videovax.Tek.COM>
Date: Wed, 14-Jan-87 16:21:53 EST
Article-I.D.: videovax.4153
Posted: Wed Jan 14 16:21:53 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 16-Jan-87 21:35:50 EST
References: <442@catnip.UUCP> <7456@utzoo.UUCP> <153@piaget.UUCP> <1384@bunker.UUCP>
Reply-To: stever@videovax.Tek.COM (Steven E. Rice, P.E.)
Organization: Tektronix Television Systems, Beaverton, Oregon
Lines: 24
Summary: 0.2 could be represented exactly on the IBM 1620!

In article <1384@bunker.UUCP>, Gary M. Samuelson (garys@bunker.UUCP)
writes:

> . . .  The
> problem is that it is not possible to represent exactly that particular
> number in typical floating point formats.  A floating point format could
> be designed which allowed exact representation of all decimal fractions,
> up to some number of places precision, but I know of no implementation
> which does that.  . . .

Oh, how quickly the glory fades!  The IBM 1620 does (now mostly _did_)
exactly what you wanted, since it is (was) a variable-operand-length, BCD
machine.

					Steve Rice

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
{decvax | hplabs | ihnp4 | uw-beaver}!tektronix!videovax!stever

inews > 50% filler
  inews > 50% filler
    inews > 50% filler
      inews > 50% filler
        inews > 50% filler