| 
									
										
										
										
											2016-08-09 17:44:52 -05:00
										 |  |  | .. testsetup::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     import math
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | .. _tut-fp-issues:
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | **************************************************
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Floating Point Arithmetic:  Issues and Limitations
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | **************************************************
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | .. sectionauthor:: Tim Peters <tim_one@users.sourceforge.net>
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Floating-point numbers are represented in computer hardware as base 2 (binary)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | fractions.  For example, the decimal fraction ::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    0.125
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | has value 1/10 + 2/100 + 5/1000, and in the same way the binary fraction ::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    0.001
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | has value 0/2 + 0/4 + 1/8.  These two fractions have identical values, the only
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | real difference being that the first is written in base 10 fractional notation,
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and the second in base 2.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Unfortunately, most decimal fractions cannot be represented exactly as binary
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | fractions.  A consequence is that, in general, the decimal floating-point
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | numbers you enter are only approximated by the binary floating-point numbers
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | actually stored in the machine.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The problem is easier to understand at first in base 10.  Consider the fraction
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 1/3.  You can approximate that as a base 10 fraction::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    0.3
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | or, better, ::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    0.33
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | or, better, ::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    0.333
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and so on.  No matter how many digits you're willing to write down, the result
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | will never be exactly 1/3, but will be an increasingly better approximation of
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 1/3.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | In the same way, no matter how many base 2 digits you're willing to use, the
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | decimal value 0.1 cannot be represented exactly as a base 2 fraction.  In base
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 2, 1/10 is the infinitely repeating fraction ::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    0.0001100110011001100110011001100110011001100110011...
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | Stop at any finite number of bits, and you get an approximation.  On most
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | machines today, floats are approximated using a binary fraction with
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  | the numerator using the first 53 bits starting with the most significant bit and
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | with the denominator as a power of two.  In the case of 1/10, the binary fraction
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | is ``3602879701896397 / 2 ** 55`` which is close to but not exactly
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | equal to the true value of 1/10.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Many users are not aware of the approximation because of the way values are
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | displayed.  Python only prints a decimal approximation to the true decimal
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | value of the binary approximation stored by the machine.  On most machines, if
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Python were to print the true decimal value of the binary approximation stored
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | for 0.1, it would have to display ::
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> 0.1
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  |    0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | That is more digits than most people find useful, so Python keeps the number
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | of digits manageable by displaying a rounded value instead ::
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  |    >>> 1 / 10
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    0.1
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | Just remember, even though the printed result looks like the exact value
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | of 1/10, the actual stored value is the nearest representable binary fraction.
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | Interestingly, there are many different decimal numbers that share the same
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | nearest approximate binary fraction.  For example, the numbers ``0.1`` and
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ``0.10000000000000001`` and
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ``0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625`` are all
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | approximated by ``3602879701896397 / 2 ** 55``.  Since all of these decimal
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 19:06:29 +00:00
										 |  |  | values share the same approximation, any one of them could be displayed
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | while still preserving the invariant ``eval(repr(x)) == x``.
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2010-07-29 13:56:56 +00:00
										 |  |  | Historically, the Python prompt and built-in :func:`repr` function would choose
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 22:30:13 +00:00
										 |  |  | the one with 17 significant digits, ``0.10000000000000001``.   Starting with
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | Python 3.1, Python (on most systems) is now able to choose the shortest of
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | these and simply display ``0.1``.
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Note that this is in the very nature of binary floating-point: this is not a bug
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | in Python, and it is not a bug in your code either.  You'll see the same kind of
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | thing in all languages that support your hardware's floating-point arithmetic
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | (although some languages may not *display* the difference by default, or in all
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | output modes).
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2011-10-19 10:58:56 +03:00
										 |  |  | For more pleasant output, you may wish to use string formatting to produce a limited number of significant digits::
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2010-08-04 20:56:28 +00:00
										 |  |  |    >>> format(math.pi, '.12g')  # give 12 significant digits
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  |    '3.14159265359'
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2010-08-04 20:56:28 +00:00
										 |  |  |    >>> format(math.pi, '.2f')   # give 2 digits after the point
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    '3.14'
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  |    >>> repr(math.pi)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    '3.141592653589793'
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | It's important to realize that this is, in a real sense, an illusion: you're
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | simply rounding the *display* of the true machine value.
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-26 20:10:50 +00:00
										 |  |  | One illusion may beget another.  For example, since 0.1 is not exactly 1/10,
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-26 21:37:46 +00:00
										 |  |  | summing three values of 0.1 may not yield exactly 0.3, either::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> .1 + .1 + .1 == .3
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    False
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Also, since the 0.1 cannot get any closer to the exact value of 1/10 and
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 0.3 cannot get any closer to the exact value of 3/10, then pre-rounding with
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | :func:`round` function cannot help::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> round(.1, 1) + round(.1, 1) + round(.1, 1) == round(.3, 1)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    False
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Though the numbers cannot be made closer to their intended exact values,
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the :func:`round` function can be useful for post-rounding so that results
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 22:30:13 +00:00
										 |  |  | with inexact values become comparable to one another::
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-26 21:37:46 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 22:30:13 +00:00
										 |  |  |     >>> round(.1 + .1 + .1, 10) == round(.3, 10)
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-26 21:37:46 +00:00
										 |  |  |     True
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Binary floating-point arithmetic holds many surprises like this.  The problem
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | with "0.1" is explained in precise detail below, in the "Representation Error"
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | section.  See `The Perils of Floating Point <http://www.lahey.com/float.htm>`_
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | for a more complete account of other common surprises.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | As that says near the end, "there are no easy answers."  Still, don't be unduly
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | wary of floating-point!  The errors in Python float operations are inherited
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | from the floating-point hardware, and on most machines are on the order of no
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | more than 1 part in 2\*\*53 per operation.  That's more than adequate for most
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 22:30:13 +00:00
										 |  |  | tasks, but you do need to keep in mind that it's not decimal arithmetic and
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | that every float operation can suffer a new rounding error.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | While pathological cases do exist, for most casual use of floating-point
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | arithmetic you'll see the result you expect in the end if you simply round the
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | display of your final results to the number of decimal digits you expect.
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-05-26 01:03:56 +00:00
										 |  |  | :func:`str` usually suffices, and for finer control see the :meth:`str.format`
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | method's format specifiers in :ref:`formatstrings`.
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-10-05 17:57:52 +00:00
										 |  |  | For use cases which require exact decimal representation, try using the
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | :mod:`decimal` module which implements decimal arithmetic suitable for
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | accounting applications and high-precision applications.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Another form of exact arithmetic is supported by the :mod:`fractions` module
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | which implements arithmetic based on rational numbers (so the numbers like
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 1/3 can be represented exactly).
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-31 03:25:11 +00:00
										 |  |  | If you are a heavy user of floating point operations you should take a look
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | at the Numerical Python package and many other packages for mathematical and
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2016-05-07 10:49:07 +03:00
										 |  |  | statistical operations supplied by the SciPy project. See <https://scipy.org>.
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-10-05 16:46:29 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Python provides tools that may help on those rare occasions when you really
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | *do* want to know the exact value of a float.  The
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | :meth:`float.as_integer_ratio` method expresses the value of a float as a
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | fraction::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> x = 3.14159
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> x.as_integer_ratio()
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 22:30:13 +00:00
										 |  |  |    (3537115888337719, 1125899906842624)
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-10-05 16:46:29 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Since the ratio is exact, it can be used to losslessly recreate the
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | original value::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     >>> x == 3537115888337719 / 1125899906842624
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     True
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The :meth:`float.hex` method expresses a float in hexadecimal (base
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 16), again giving the exact value stored by your computer::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> x.hex()
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    '0x1.921f9f01b866ep+1'
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | This precise hexadecimal representation can be used to reconstruct
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the float value exactly::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     >>> x == float.fromhex('0x1.921f9f01b866ep+1')
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     True
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Since the representation is exact, it is useful for reliably porting values
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | across different versions of Python (platform independence) and exchanging
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | data with other languages that support the same format (such as Java and C99).
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-26 22:01:46 +00:00
										 |  |  | Another helpful tool is the :func:`math.fsum` function which helps mitigate
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | loss-of-precision during summation.  It tracks "lost digits" as values are
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | added onto a running total.  That can make a difference in overall accuracy
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | so that the errors do not accumulate to the point where they affect the
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | final total:
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> sum([0.1] * 10) == 1.0
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    False
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> math.fsum([0.1] * 10) == 1.0
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    True
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-10-05 16:46:29 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | .. _tut-fp-error:
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Representation Error
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ====================
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | This section explains the "0.1" example in detail, and shows how you can perform
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | an exact analysis of cases like this yourself.  Basic familiarity with binary
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | floating-point representation is assumed.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | :dfn:`Representation error` refers to the fact that some (most, actually)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | decimal fractions cannot be represented exactly as binary (base 2) fractions.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | This is the chief reason why Python (or Perl, C, C++, Java, Fortran, and many
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | others) often won't display the exact decimal number you expect.
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Why is that?  1/10 is not exactly representable as a binary fraction. Almost all
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | machines today (November 2000) use IEEE-754 floating point arithmetic, and
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | almost all platforms map Python floats to IEEE-754 "double precision".  754
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | doubles contain 53 bits of precision, so on input the computer strives to
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
											  
											
												Merged revisions 69129-69131,69139-69140,69143,69154-69159,69169,69288-69289,69293,69297-69301,69348 via svnmerge from
svn+ssh://pythondev@svn.python.org/python/trunk
........
  r69129 | benjamin.peterson | 2009-01-30 19:42:55 -0600 (Fri, 30 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  check the errno in bad fd cases
........
  r69130 | andrew.kuchling | 2009-01-30 20:50:09 -0600 (Fri, 30 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  Add a section
........
  r69131 | andrew.kuchling | 2009-01-30 21:26:02 -0600 (Fri, 30 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  Text edits and markup fixes
........
  r69139 | mark.dickinson | 2009-01-31 10:44:04 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 2 lines
  Add an extra test for long <-> float hash equivalence.
........
  r69140 | benjamin.peterson | 2009-01-31 10:52:03 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  PyErr_BadInternalCall() raises a SystemError, not TypeError #5112
........
  r69143 | benjamin.peterson | 2009-01-31 15:00:10 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  I believe the intention here was to avoid a global lookup
........
  r69154 | benjamin.peterson | 2009-01-31 16:33:02 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  fix indentation in comment
........
  r69155 | david.goodger | 2009-01-31 16:53:46 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  markup fix
........
  r69156 | gregory.p.smith | 2009-01-31 16:57:30 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 4 lines
  - Issue #5104: The socket module now raises OverflowError when 16-bit port and
    protocol numbers are supplied outside the allowed 0-65536 range on bind()
    and getservbyport().
........
  r69157 | benjamin.peterson | 2009-01-31 17:43:25 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  add explanatory comment
........
  r69158 | benjamin.peterson | 2009-01-31 17:54:38 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 1 line
  more flags which only work for function blocks
........
  r69159 | gregory.p.smith | 2009-01-31 18:16:01 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 2 lines
  Update doc wording as suggested in issue4903.
........
  r69169 | guilherme.polo | 2009-01-31 20:56:16 -0600 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009) | 3 lines
  Restore Tkinter.Tk._loadtk so this test doesn't fail for problems
  related to ttk.
........
  r69288 | georg.brandl | 2009-02-05 04:30:57 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  #5153: fix typo in example.
........
  r69289 | georg.brandl | 2009-02-05 04:37:07 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  #5144: document that PySys_SetArgv prepends the script directory (or the empty string) to sys.path.
........
  r69293 | georg.brandl | 2009-02-05 04:59:28 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  #5059: fix example.
........
  r69297 | georg.brandl | 2009-02-05 05:32:18 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  #5015: document PythonHome API functions.
........
  r69298 | georg.brandl | 2009-02-05 05:33:21 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  #4827: fix callback example.
........
  r69299 | georg.brandl | 2009-02-05 05:35:28 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  #4820: use correct module for ctypes.util.
........
  r69300 | georg.brandl | 2009-02-05 05:38:23 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  #4563: disable alpha and roman lists, fixes wrong formatting of contributor list.
........
  r69301 | georg.brandl | 2009-02-05 05:40:35 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  #5031: fix Thread.daemon property docs.
........
  r69348 | benjamin.peterson | 2009-02-05 19:47:31 -0600 (Thu, 05 Feb 2009) | 1 line
  fix download link
........
											
										 
											2009-02-06 02:40:07 +00:00
										 |  |  | convert 0.1 to the closest fraction it can of the form *J*/2**\ *N* where *J* is
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | an integer containing exactly 53 bits.  Rewriting ::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    1 / 10 ~= J / (2**N)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | as ::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    J ~= 2**N / 10
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and recalling that *J* has exactly 53 bits (is ``>= 2**52`` but ``< 2**53``),
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the best value for *N* is 56::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  |     >>> 2**52 <=  2**56 // 10  < 2**53
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     True
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | That is, 56 is the only value for *N* that leaves *J* with exactly 53 bits.  The
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | best possible value for *J* is then that quotient rounded::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> q, r = divmod(2**56, 10)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> r
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-08-10 12:16:45 +00:00
										 |  |  |    6
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Since the remainder is more than half of 10, the best approximation is obtained
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | by rounding up::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> q+1
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-08-10 12:16:45 +00:00
										 |  |  |    7205759403792794
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  | Therefore the best possible approximation to 1/10 in 754 double precision is::
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  |    7205759403792794 / 2 ** 56
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | Dividing both the numerator and denominator by two reduces the fraction to::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  |    3602879701896397 / 2 ** 55
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | Note that since we rounded up, this is actually a little bit larger than 1/10;
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | if we had not rounded up, the quotient would have been a little bit smaller than
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 1/10.  But in no case can it be *exactly* 1/10!
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | So the computer never "sees" 1/10:  what it sees is the exact fraction given
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | above, the best 754 double approximation it can get::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  |    >>> 0.1 * 2 ** 55
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    3602879701896397.0
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  | If we multiply that fraction by 10\*\*55, we can see the value out to
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 55 decimal digits::
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  |    >>> 3602879701896397 * 10 ** 55 // 2 ** 55
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  |    1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  | meaning that the exact number stored in the computer is equal to
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the decimal value 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625.
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Instead of displaying the full decimal value, many languages (including
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | older versions of Python), round the result to 17 significant digits::
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> format(0.1, '.17f')
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    '0.10000000000000001'
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  | The :mod:`fractions` and :mod:`decimal` modules make these calculations
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | easy::
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-08-15 14:28:22 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-24 03:09:06 +00:00
										 |  |  |    >>> from decimal import Decimal
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> from fractions import Fraction
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-06-28 23:21:38 +00:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> Fraction.from_float(0.1)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    Fraction(3602879701896397, 36028797018963968)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> (0.1).as_integer_ratio()
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    (3602879701896397, 36028797018963968)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> Decimal.from_float(0.1)
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    Decimal('0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625')
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    >>> format(Decimal.from_float(0.1), '.17')
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |    '0.10000000000000001'
 |