3 ms·
Sure there are tradeoffs. Everyone in the thread implies I want to completely obsolete FP or whatnot :( Have you thought through the small angles example? Beca
by rini17 7y ago
Sure there are tradeoffs. Everyone in the thread implies I want to completely obsolete FP or whatnot :(
Have you thought through the small angles example? Because sin(x) is equal to x for small angles. Then, as x raises further, we are entering densest area of farey sequence, so the precision is fine there too.
- iainmerrick 7y agoSorry to be overly harsh! I think I was initially excited by the suggestion, then disappointed when I thought it through and found it less compelling that it sounded. :) Re small angles, I don’t quite follow; if I have a couple of small angles, say 0.01 and 0.015, isn’t it useful to have good resolution around 0 so I can represent them reasonably accurately? The Farey sequence seems to have its biggest gap right at that point, between 0 and 1/N.
- rini17 7y agoI don't follow either. When sin(0.01rad) = 0,0099998333... and you do need the 0,00000026 precision you just choose representation with enough bits, same as with floating point.