Precision[N[1.0, 20]]
Precision[N[1, 20]]
MachinePrecision 20.
It would be so much more intuitive and less error prone, if Precision[N[1.0, 20]]
would be 20
and not MachinePrecision
. Why do I have to explicitly use N[Rationalized[1.0], 20]
to upgrade the precision?
If it is about the warning messages during the calculations, Mathematica could return a warning already at the Precision[N[1.0, 20]]
step.
Edit
I am not attempting to use N
for rounding. I also understand the difference between MachinePrecision
and arbitrary precision, which is very well described in this answer.
I want to know, why does Mathematica not consider the description of the number existing in the underling binary representation as exact if I apply N
, and why I need to wrap it with Rationalize
.
Is it performance?
Is it some deep semantic meaning of N
vs SetPrecision
?
Is set SetPrecision
any different from N@Rationalize@
?
SetPrecision
instead. $\endgroup$SetPrecision
does exactly, what I thoughtN
should do. Why do I even bother readingtutorial/NumericalPrecision
and other related guides? $\endgroup$