[plt-dev] Re: [PRL] Programming Languages in the Code of Federal Regulations

Andrew Reilly <areilly at bigpond.net.au> writes:

> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 13:47:56 +0200
> Michael Sperber <sperber at deinprogramm.de> wrote:
>
>> No, it isn't.  You may want to re-read what I wrote.
>
> Do you have another explanation for those recent developments in
> the world of floating point arithmetic?
>
> I accept that I might have mis-interpreted your post.  As I said,
> I think that side is wrong, and I don't care to argue the point.
> Just thought that ".. everyone .. has long accepted binary
> floating point as .. adequate for doing financial
> calculations..." needed a counterpoint.

Again, you might want to re-read what I wrote.  In particular, you
replaced some important stuff by ellipses.  Here's the full quote:

>> Most everyone in that community has long accepted binary
>> floating-point as completely adequate for doing financial
>> calculations for complex products.

In particular, "everyone in that community" is not the same as
"everyone", and "financial calculations" is not the same as "financial
calculations for complex products.".

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla