There's no text in the documentation about what that means, but it sounds very important to understand in order to not run into trouble. Does someone know what that is all about the "significant digits" of a number?
Although the other answer on this question links to a correct explanation of the concept of significant digits in general, NSNumberFormatter's {uses|minimum|maximum}SignificantDigits properties have nothing to do with precision of calculations.
The significant digits are the group of digits in a number from the first nonzero digit to the last nonzero digit, inclusive, usually unless trailing zeroes are fractional. Restricting output to a specific number of significant digits is useful if a relative (percentage) error is known or desired.
First of all, the minimumSignificantDigits and maximumSignificantDigits have no effect unless usesSignificantDigits is set to YES. If this is the case, their effect is probably most easily explained using examples.
Let's take the numbers a = 123.4567, b = 1.23, and c = 0.00123:
Assuming minimumSignificantDigits = 0, 1 or 2:
If maximumSignificantDigits = 3, then a will be formatted as "123", b as "1.23", and c as "0.00123".
If maximumSignificantDigits = 4, then a will be formatted as "123.5", b as "1.23" and c as "0.00123".
If maximumSignificantDigits = 2, then a will be formatted as "120", b as "1.2" and c as "0.0012".
Assuming minimumSignificantDigits = 4:
If maximumSignificantDigits = 4, then a will be formatted as "123.5", b as "1.230", and c as "0.001230".
Note: The 4 → 5 conversions occur due to the round-to-nearest mode, as the digit following the 4 in a is 5.
See here for a nice tutorial on significant digits. Very simple explanation would be: the number of digits that are used for calculations within your app.
Related
I need to transform a date, expressed as a number of seconds since 2000-01-01T00:00:00, to a pandas.Timestamp with a resolution of 1 ns.
I have found two options:
Use: pandas.to_datetime(VALUE, unit='s', epoch=pandas.Timestamp(2000, 1, 1))
Use: epoch=pandas.Timestamp(2000, 1, 1) + pandas.to_timedelta(VALUE, unit='sec')
I was expecting the both of them provide the same result but the results are slightly different, e.g.:
In [2]: Y2K = pandas.Timestamp(2000, 1, 1)
...:
...: s = 538121125.6849735
...:
...: t1 = pandas.to_datetime(s, unit='s', origin=Y2K)
...: t2 = Y2K + pandas.to_timedelta(s, unit='sec')
...:
...: t1 - t2
Out[2]: Timedelta('0 days 00:00:00.000000090')
Am I doing something wrong? Can, this discrepancy, be considered as a bug?
Which is the more correct way to execute this task? Please note that I need a resolution up to 1 ns.
I wouldn't say that's a bug, that's just an incorrect use of pandas.to_datetime method. The second method you proposed seems to be the proper one. It is more accurate because it takes into account the fact that Timestamp is a combination of a date and a time, whereas the first method only takes the date component into account.
Float (double precision) can store only 15 digits (15.9). You use 9 for the integer part, so you can expect only 7 digit precision on decimal part. And you get it as expected.
In any case, do you expect so much precision for any clocks?
As #ChrisQ267 mentioned in the other answer, programs tend to store times in different components, so you have more precision. Common is either date and time in two fields, or second and the decimal part of second fields. So float is not so ideal for high precision timestamps.
But in any case both methods you are using are not precise: both misses leap seconds, so the real result is already off by several seconds (not just the 8 decimal place).
I am currently trying to figure out how to multiply two numbers in fixed point representation.
Say my number representation is as follows:
[SIGN][2^0].[2^-1][2^-2]..[2^-14]
In my case, the number 10.01000000000000 = -0.25.
How would I for example do 0.25x0.25 or -0.25x0.25 etc?
Hope you can help!
You should use 2's complement representation instead of a seperate sign bit. It's much easier to do maths on that, no special handling is required. The range is also improved because there's no wasted bit pattern for negative 0. To multiply, just do as normal fixed-point multiplication. The normal Q2.14 format will store value x/214 for the bit pattern of x, therefore if we have A and B then
So you just need to multiply A and B directly then divide the product by 214 to get the result back into the form x/214 like this
AxB = ((int32_t)A*B) >> 14;
A rounding step is needed to get the nearest value. You can find the way to do it in Q number format#Math operations. The simplest way to round to nearest is just add back the bit that was last shifted out (i.e. the first fractional bit) like this
AxB = (int32_t)A*B;
AxB = (AxB >> 14) + ((AxB >> 13) & 1);
You might also want to read these
Fixed-point arithmetic.
Emulated Fixed Point Division/Multiplication
Fixed point math in c#?
With 2 bits you can represent the integer range of [-2, 1]. So using Q2.14 format, -0.25 would be stored as 11.11000000000000. Using 1 sign bit you can only represent -1, 0, 1, and it makes calculations more complex because you need to split the sign bit then combine it back at the end.
Multiply into a larger sized variable, and then right shift by the number of bits of fixed point precision.
Here's a simple example in C:
int a = 0.25 * (1 << 16);
int b = -0.25 * (1 << 16);
int c = (a * b) >> 16;
printf("%.2f * %.2f = %.2f\n", a / 65536.0, b / 65536.0 , c / 65536.0);
You basically multiply everything by a constant to bring the fractional parts up into the integer range, then multiply the two factors, then (optionally) divide by one of the constants to return the product to the standard range for use in future calculations. It's like multiplying prices expressed in fractional dollars by 100 and then working in cents (i.e. $1.95 * 100 cents/dollar = 195 cents).
Be careful not to overflow the range of the variable you are multiplying into. Your constant might need to be smaller to avoid overflow, like using 1 << 8 instead of 1 << 16 in the example above.
I just came across this piece of code:
Dim d As Double
For i = 1 To 10
d = d + 0.1
Next
MsgBox(d)
MsgBox(d = 1)
MsgBox(1 - d)
Can anyone explain me the reason for that? Why d is set to 1?
Floating point types and integer types cannot be compared directly, as their binary representations are different.
The result of adding 0.1 ten times as a floating point type may well be a value that is close to 1, but not exactly.
When comparing floating point values, you need to use a minimum value by which the values can differ and still be considered the same value (this value is normally known as the epsilon). This value depends on the application.
I suggest reading What Every Computer Scientist Should Know About Floating-Point Arithmetic for an in-depth discussion.
As for comaring 1 to 1.0 - these are different types so will not compare to each other.
.1 (1/10th) is a repeating fraction when converted to binary:
.0001100110011001100110011001100110011.....
It would be like trying to show 1/3 as a decimal: you just can't do it accurately.
This is because a double is always only an approximation of the value and not the exact value itself (like a floating point value). When you need an exact decimal value, instead use a Decimal.
Contrast with:
Dim d As Decimal
For i = 1 To 10
d = d + 0.1
Next
MsgBox(1)
MsgBox(d = 1)
MsgBox(1 - d)
I have been reading about bit operators in Objective-C in Kochan's book, "Programming in Objective-C".
I am VERY confused about this part, although I have really understood most everything else presented to me thus far.
Here is a quote from the book:
The Bitwise AND Operator
Bitwise ANDing is frequently used for masking operations. That is, this operator can be used easily to set specific bits of a data item to 0. For example, the statement
w3 = w1 & 3;
assigns to w3 the value of w1 bitwise ANDed with the constant 3. This has the same ffect of setting all the bits in w, other than the rightmost two bits to 0 and preserving the rightmost two bits from w1.
As with all binary arithmetic operators in C, the binary bit operators can also be used as assignment operators by adding an equal sign. The statement
word &= 15;
therefore performs the same function as the following:
word = word & 15;
Additionally, it has the effect of setting all but the rightmost four bits of word to 0. When using constants in performing bitwise operations, it is usually more convenient to express the constants in either octal or hexadecimal notation.
OK, so that is what I'm trying to understand. Now, I'm extremely confused with pretty much this entire concept and I am just looking for a little clarification if anyone is willing to help me out on that.
When the book references "setting all the bits" now, all of the bits.. What exactly is a bit. Isn't that just a 0 or 1 in 2nd base, in other words, binary?
If so, why, in the first example, are all of the bits except the "rightmost 2" to 0? Is it 2 because it's 3 - 1, taking 3 from our constant?
Thanks!
Numbers can be expressed in binary like this:
3 = 000011
5 = 000101
10 = 001010
...etc. I'm going to assume you're familiar with binary.
Bitwise AND means to take two numbers, line them up on top of each other, and create a new number that has a 1 where both numbers have a 1 (everything else is 0).
For example:
3 => 00011
& 5 => 00101
------ -------
1 00001
Bitwise OR means to take two numbers, line them up on top of each other, and create a new number that has a 1 where either number has a 1 (everything else is 0).
For example:
3 => 00011
| 5 => 00101
------ -------
7 00111
Bitwise XOR (exclusive OR) means to take two numbers, line them up on top of each other, and create a new number that has a 1 where either number has a 1 AND the other number has a 0 (everything else is 0).
For example:
3 => 00011
^ 5 => 00101
------ -------
6 00110
Bitwise NOR (Not OR) means to take the Bitwise OR of two numbers, and then reverse everything (where there was a 0, there's now a 1, where there was a 1, there's now a 0).
Bitwise NAND (Not AND) means to take the Bitwise AND of two numbers, and then reverse everything (where there was a 0, there's now a 1, where there was a 1, there's now a 0).
Continuing: why does word &= 15 set all but the 4 rightmost bits to 0? You should be able to figure it out now...
n => abcdefghjikl
& 15 => 000000001111
------ --------------
? 00000000jikl
(0 AND a = 0, 0 AND b = 0, ... j AND 1 = j, i AND 1 = i, ...)
How is this useful? In many languages, we use things called "bitmasks". A bitmask is essentially a number that represents a whole bunch of smaller numbers combined together. We can combine numbers together using OR, and pull them apart using AND. For example:
int MagicMap = 1;
int MagicWand = 2;
int MagicHat = 4;
If I only have the map and the hat, I can express that as myInventoryBitmask = (MagicMap | MagicHat) and the result is my bitmask. If I don't have anything, then my bitmask is 0. If I want to see if I have my wand, then I can do:
int hasWand = (myInventoryBitmask & MagicWand);
if (hasWand > 0) {
printf("I have a wand\n");
} else {
printf("I don't have a wand\n");
}
Get it?
EDIT: more stuff
You'll also come across the "bitshift" operator: << and >>. This just means "shift everything left n bits" or "shift everything right n bits".
In other words:
1 << 3 = 0001 << 3 = 0001000 = 8
And:
8 >> 2 = 01000 >> 2 = 010 = 2
"Bit" is short for "binary digit". And yes, it's a 0 or 1. There are almost always 8 in a byte, and they're written kinda like decimal numbers are -- with the most significant digit on the left, and the least significant on the right.
In your example, w1 & 3 masks everything but the two least significant (rightmost) digits because 3, in binary, is 00000011. (2 + 1) The AND operation returns 0 if either bit being ANDed is 0, so everything but the last two bits are automatically 0.
w1 = ????...??ab
3 = 0000...0011
--------------------
& = 0000...00ab
0 & any bit N = 0
1 & any bit N = N
So, anything bitwise anded with 3 has all their bits except the last two set to 0. The last two bits, a and b in this case, are preserved.
#cHao & all: No! Bits are not numbers. They’re not zero or one!
Well, 0 and 1 are possible and valid interpretations. Zero and one is the typical interpretation.
But a bit is only a thing, representing a simple alternative. It says “it is” or “it is not”. It doesn’t say anything about the thing, the „it“, itself. It doesn’t tell, what thing it is.
In most cases this won’t bother you. You can take them for numbers (or parts, digits, of numbers) as you (or the combination of programming languages, cpu and other hardware, you know as being “typical”) usaly do – and maybe you’ll never have trouble with them.
But there is no principal problem if you switch the meaning of “0“ and “1”. Ok, if doing this while programming assembler, you’ll find it a bit problematic as some mnemonics will do other logic then they tell you with their names, numbers will be negated and such things.
Have a look at http://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~amaral/courses/329/webslides/Topic2-DeMorganLaws/sld017.htm if you want.
Greetings
So I thought that negative numbers, when mod'ed should be put into positive space... I cant get this to happen in objective-c
I expect this:
-1 % 3 = 2
0 % 3 = 0
1 % 3 = 1
2 % 3 = 2
But get this
-1 % 3 = -1
0 % 3 = 0
1 % 3 = 1
2 % 3 = 2
Why is this and is there a workaround?
result = n % 3;
if( result < 0 ) result += 3;
Don't perform extra mod operations as suggested in the other answers. They are very expensive and unnecessary.
In C and Objective-C, the division and modulus operators perform truncation towards zero. a / b is floor(a / b) if a / b > 0, otherwise it is ceiling(a / b) if a / b < 0. It is always the case that a == (a / b) * b + (a % b), unless of course b is 0. As a consequence, positive % positive == positive, positive % negative == positive, negative % positive == negative, and negative % negative == negative (you can work out the logic for all 4 cases, although it's a little tricky).
If n has a limited range, then you can get the result you want simply by adding a known constant multiple of 3 that is greater that the absolute value of the minimum.
For example, if n is limited to -1000..2000, then you can use the expression:
result = (n+1002) % 3;
Make sure the maximum plus your constant will not overflow when summed.
We have a problem of language:
math-er-says: i take this number plus that number mod other-number
code-er-hears: I add two numbers and then devide the result by other-number
code-er-says: what about negative numbers?
math-er-says: WHAT? fields mod other-number don't have a concept of negative numbers?
code-er-says: field what? ...
the math person in this conversations is talking about doing math in a circular number line. If you subtract off the bottom you wrap around to the top.
the code person is talking about an operator that calculates remainder.
In this case you want the mathematician's mod operator and have the remainder function at your disposal. you can convert the remainder operator into the mathematician's mod operator by checking to see if you fell of the bottom each time you do subtraction.
If this will be the behavior, and you know that it will be, then for m % n = r, just use r = n + r. If you're unsure of what will happen here, use then r = r % n.
Edit: To sum up, use r = ( n + ( m % n ) ) % n
I would have expected a positive number, as well, but I found this, from ISO/IEC 14882:2003 : Programming languages -- C++, 5.6.4 (found in the Wikipedia article on the modulus operation):
The binary % operator yields the remainder from the division of the first expression by the second. .... If both operands are nonnegative then the remainder is nonnegative; if not, the sign of the remainder is implementation-defined
JavaScript does this, too. I've been caught by it a couple times. Think of it as a reflection around zero rather than a continuation.
Why: because that is the way the mod operator is specified in the C-standard (Remember that Objective-C is an extension of C). It confuses most people I know (like me) because it is surprising and you have to remember it.
As to a workaround: I would use uncleo's.
UncleO's answer is probably more robust, but if you want to do it on a single line, and you're certain the negative value will not be more negative than a single iteration of the mod (for example if you're only ever subtracting at most the mod value at any time) you can simplify it to a single expression:
int result = (n + 3) % 3;
Since you're doing the mod anyway, adding 3 to the initial value has no effect unless n is negative (but not less than -3) in which case it causes result to be the expected positive modulus.
There are two choices for the remainder, and the sign depends on the language. ANSI C chooses the sign of the dividend. I would suspect this is why you see Objective-C doing so also. See the wikipedia entry as well.
Not only java script, almost all the languages shows the wrong answer'
what coneybeare said is correct, when we have mode'd we have to get remainder
Remainder is nothing but which remains after division and it should be a positive integer....
If you check the number line you can understand that
I also face the same issue in VB and and it made me to forcefully add extra check like
if the result is a negative we have to add the divisor to the result
Instead of a%b
Use: a-b*floor((float)a/(float)b)
You're expecting remainder and are using modulo. In math they are the same thing, in C they are different. GNU-C has Rem() and Mod(), objective-c only has mod() so you will have to use the code above to simulate rem function (which is the same as mod in the math world, but not in the programming world [for most languages at least])
Also note you could define an easy to use macro for this.
#define rem(a,b) ((int)(a-b*floor((float)a/(float)b)))
Then you could just use rem(-1,3) in your code and it should work fine.