Rojolalalalalalalalalalalalala
Reputation
31,288
495/400 score
 Jan 25 comment Is the divergence between Round and setting an explicit precision intentional or a bug? Or, for that matter, 1000 which doesn't require rounding up shows as 1.0*10^2 Jan 25 comment Is the divergence between Round and setting an explicit precision intentional or a bug? So, 540 with an error of 1 rounds to tens just like an error of 3.16 (54-0.5). Both give 5.*10^1. But as you said, misteriously, when you get an extra digit by rounding up, it seems weird (even buggy?): 960 is 1.*10^2, 960.001 is 96. and 940 is 9.*10^1 Jan 25 comment Is the divergence between Round and setting an explicit precision intentional or a bug? In general, it seems the absolute error should be strictly smaller than the least significant display digit unit, so an accuracy of 0 (or error of 1) demands that the last digit displayed is "tens" (just as if the error was 9, 8 or 4). So the 0 accuracy is the borderline value. Try it with any number that doesn't get a new digit when rounding up, or that doesn't lose all significant digits getting 0 (both weird cases) Jan 25 comment Is the divergence between Round and setting an explicit precision intentional or a bug? As to the display digits, there are some cases that confuse me, particularly when it has no digits to display and chooses to display 0.. Others really seem buggy, such as 960 displaying as 1.*10^2 instead of 1.0*10^2 Jan 25 comment Is the divergence between Round and setting an explicit precision intentional or a bug? As to 2.51*2.11 displaying 0 instead of a red output, also seems weird, but it is still a display problem only. It should give about 5.25 with a 40% uncertainty aprox (less precision than a significant digit) Jan 20 revised OutputResponse and RecurrenceFilter failure in WM10 with increased precision datasets edited title Jan 18 awarded Yearling Jan 16 comment “Meta-matching” patterns How would you owant to deal with expressions with things like x[Verbatim[2/;True]] or x[HoldPattern[2]]? Jan 16 revised What is the purpose of InternalLocalizedBlock? added 2 characters in body Jan 16 revised What is the purpose of InternalLocalizedBlock? added 874 characters in body Jan 16 revised What is the purpose of InternalLocalizedBlock? added 75 characters in body Jan 16 comment What is the purpose of InternalLocalizedBlock? Ok, I now can test this. Let's see Jan 16 revised What is the purpose of InternalLocalizedBlock? added 75 characters in body Jan 16 comment What is the purpose of InternalLocalizedBlock? @Mr.Wizard how I think it works. Does it fail easy tests? Jan 16 revised What is the purpose of InternalLocalizedBlock? added 12 characters in body Jan 16 answered What is the purpose of InternalLocalizedBlock? Jan 12 comment A simple experiment to understand CUDAFunctionLoad Thanks for the clarifications. I used to more or less get CudaFunctionLoad, but I haven't used it in a while, and for a few more days I am far from my dear home PC with a CUDA GPU to try. Hope someone answers soon :) Jan 8 comment A simple experiment to understand CUDAFunctionLoad You should post a more concrete question. What result where you expecting and why and where does it differ from what you get? Jan 8 comment What are all the named Mathematica styles? Great find!! :) Jan 5 comment Extract common factor from vector or matrix Perhaps leaving an inactive expression might be useful? facMat[m_] := m /. mat : IgnoringInactive[{{f_ _ ..} ..}?MatrixQ] :> Inactivate[f (mat /. IgnoringInactive[f i_] :> i), Times]