Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. BUG in Windows Calc [modified]

BUG in Windows Calc [modified]

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
comsysadminwindows-admintoolshelp
64 Posts 36 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • B Bassam Abdul Baki

    Clicking the 5 is hard for you?

    Web - BM - RSS - Math - LinkedIn

    H Offline
    H Offline
    Hiren solanki
    wrote on last edited by
    #17

    It takes half and hour to reach to rating link. :laugh:

    Rating is Always appreciated.
    Regards,
    Hiren Solanki.
    Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


    "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

    N 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • N NMehta83

      For this answer i will give you +5 :laugh:

      NMehta83 “We cannot fail until we fail to try”

      D Offline
      D Offline
      Dalek Dave
      wrote on last edited by
      #18

      Amd yet you haven't!

      ------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]

      N 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • H Hiren solanki

        It takes half and hour to reach to rating link. :laugh:

        Rating is Always appreciated.
        Regards,
        Hiren Solanki.
        Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


        "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

        N Offline
        N Offline
        NMehta83
        wrote on last edited by
        #19

        Now have my another +5 :laugh:

        NMehta83 “We cannot fail until we fail to try”

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • N NMehta83

          For this answer i will give you +5 :laugh:

          NMehta83 “We cannot fail until we fail to try”

          H Offline
          H Offline
          Hiren solanki
          wrote on last edited by
          #20

          NMehta83 wrote:

          i will give you +5

          It's 10 minute already, still not deposited :laugh:

          Rating is Always appreciated.
          Regards,
          Hiren Solanki.
          Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


          "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • N NMehta83

            Follow the procedure click '4' click 'sqrt' click '-'(Minus sign) click '2' ('-8.1648465955514287168521180122928e-39') click '+' click '2' Answer should be 2 and It shows 2 only :~

            NMehta83 “We cannot fail until we fail to try”

            H Offline
            H Offline
            Hiren solanki
            wrote on last edited by
            #21

            Looks like windows support person. take a 5.

            Rating is Always appreciated.
            Regards,
            Hiren Solanki.
            Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


            "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

            N 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • D Dalek Dave

              Amd yet you haven't!

              ------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]

              N Offline
              N Offline
              NMehta83
              wrote on last edited by
              #22

              I was laughing so i forgot...but now you can check :)

              NMehta83 “We cannot fail until we fail to try”

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • N NMehta83

                Follow the procedure click '4' click 'sqrt' click '-'(Minus sign) click '2' ('-8.1648465955514287168521180122928e-39') click '+' click '2' Answer should be 2 and It shows 2 only :~

                NMehta83 “We cannot fail until we fail to try”

                L Offline
                L Offline
                leppie
                wrote on last edited by
                #23

                I already said that... (but -2, same thing however).

                ((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • H Hiren solanki

                  Looks like windows support person. take a 5.

                  Rating is Always appreciated.
                  Regards,
                  Hiren Solanki.
                  Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


                  "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

                  N Offline
                  N Offline
                  NMehta83
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #24

                  nah!!!!!! After your post just playing with calc and got that. :)

                  NMehta83 “We cannot fail until we fail to try”

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • D Dalek Dave

                    Hiren Solanki wrote:

                    Answer should be 0

                    Or -4!

                    ------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]

                    K Offline
                    K Offline
                    Khaniya
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #25

                    Dalek Dave wrote:

                    Or -4!

                    why DD? can you explain?

                    Life's Like a mirror. Smile at it & it smiles back at you.- P Pilgrim So Smile Please

                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • H Hiren solanki

                      Follow the procedure click '4' click 'sqrt' click '-'(Minus sign) click '2' Answer should be 0 But It comes back with '-8.1648465955514287168521180122928e-39' answer ;P [Edit] Tested with XP and Seven _[/More Edit] Windows Server 2008 R2 comes same with yet another answer '-1.068281969439142e-19' _[/More Edit] [/Edit]

                      Rating is Always appreciated.
                      Regards,
                      Hiren Solanki.
                      Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


                      "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

                      modified on Monday, November 1, 2010 7:00 AM

                      R Offline
                      R Offline
                      Rhuros
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #26

                      On Windows 7 In Standard Mode you get: -1.068281969439142e-19 In Scientific Mode you get: -8.1648465955514287168521180122928e-39

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • K Khaniya

                        Dalek Dave wrote:

                        Or -4!

                        why DD? can you explain?

                        Life's Like a mirror. Smile at it & it smiles back at you.- P Pilgrim So Smile Please

                        L Offline
                        L Offline
                        Lost User
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #27

                        The square root of 4 is either 2 or -2. -2 - 2 = -4.

                        Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L leppie

                          Another fails the knowledge about floating point.... When will they ever learn????? Edit: It seems to happen with any rounding around 0. If your result is not 0, the result is correctly rounded, but with values very near 0, it simply 'forgets'.... Edit 2: Press = again, the answer will be -2 as expected confirming the previous value is not rounded correctly, but still good enough due to its 'smallness' (e-39 is very small).

                          ((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))

                          modified on Monday, November 1, 2010 7:07 AM

                          P Offline
                          P Offline
                          peterchen
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #28

                          Actually, Calc internals have been replaced (around XP) with a long numbers library, so it is somehow noteworthy that this isn't enough. OTOH, the OP failed to notice tha 8e-39 is zero enough when playing around with square roots of 2.

                          Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
                          | FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy

                          L Q M 3 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • P peterchen

                            Actually, Calc internals have been replaced (around XP) with a long numbers library, so it is somehow noteworthy that this isn't enough. OTOH, the OP failed to notice tha 8e-39 is zero enough when playing around with square roots of 2.

                            Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
                            | FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy

                            L Offline
                            L Offline
                            leppie
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #29

                            peterchen wrote:

                            OTOH, the OP failed to notice tha 8e-39 is zero enough when playing around with square roots of 2.

                            And that is why I cleverly did not point out who the FAILER actually was ;P

                            ((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • P peterchen

                              Actually, Calc internals have been replaced (around XP) with a long numbers library, so it is somehow noteworthy that this isn't enough. OTOH, the OP failed to notice tha 8e-39 is zero enough when playing around with square roots of 2.

                              Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
                              | FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy

                              Q Offline
                              Q Offline
                              QuiJohn
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #30

                              peterchen wrote:

                              Actually, Calc internals have been replaced (around XP) with a long numbers library, so it is somehow noteworthy that this isn't enough.

                              I actually thought I heard it referred to as an "infinite precision" calculator. I've tested it before on values that would make the pre-XP calc choke, but apparently it's not infinite. Ah, googled it... apparently "arbitrary" precision is what it's called. I think MS changed it in the wake of that idiotic, much publicized and ultimately harmless Pentium "floating point" bug. People kept thinking they were finding more bugs, but they were just running into typical floating point inaccuracies.


                              He said, "Boy I'm just old and lonely, But thank you for your concern, Here's wishing you a Happy New Year." I wished him one back in return.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • L leppie

                                Another fails the knowledge about floating point.... When will they ever learn????? Edit: It seems to happen with any rounding around 0. If your result is not 0, the result is correctly rounded, but with values very near 0, it simply 'forgets'.... Edit 2: Press = again, the answer will be -2 as expected confirming the previous value is not rounded correctly, but still good enough due to its 'smallness' (e-39 is very small).

                                ((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))

                                modified on Monday, November 1, 2010 7:07 AM

                                D Offline
                                D Offline
                                Dan Neely
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #31

                                leppie wrote:

                                Another fails the knowledge about floating point.... When will they ever learn?????

                                ... not until this[^] (What Every Computer Scientist Should Know About Floating-Point Arithmetic) is added to the standard curriculum. :sigh: :sigh:

                                3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • H Hiren solanki

                                  Follow the procedure click '4' click 'sqrt' click '-'(Minus sign) click '2' Answer should be 0 But It comes back with '-8.1648465955514287168521180122928e-39' answer ;P [Edit] Tested with XP and Seven _[/More Edit] Windows Server 2008 R2 comes same with yet another answer '-1.068281969439142e-19' _[/More Edit] [/Edit]

                                  Rating is Always appreciated.
                                  Regards,
                                  Hiren Solanki.
                                  Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


                                  "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

                                  modified on Monday, November 1, 2010 7:00 AM

                                  R Offline
                                  R Offline
                                  Roger Wright
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #32

                                  It's called rounding error, and the problem has been around since computers ran on vacuum tubes. The error has become smaller over the years as bits have been added to operands, but it still occurs due the fact that the finite representation of values which are not, in fact, expressible as a mantissa and a fixed length exponent, can contain a small error. It happens to be very noticeable around zero, but it's present in all FP calculations. It is for that reason programmers have been taught for decades never to use a comparison to zero when the control variable is calcuated using floating point math. It leads to expressions like:

                                  if ((x - k =< 0)|(x + k =< 0))
                                  {
                                  DoSomeThingUsefulBecauseXisZero();
                                  }

                                  The if argument tests for x = 0, +/- k, a constant value. It stumped me when I first saw it in missle guidance test code, until my boss reminded me of what I'd been taught in my only programming class a few years earlier - a bit embarrassing... :-O Have they finally stopped teaching this? :-D

                                  Will Rogers never met me.

                                  H 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • L leppie

                                    Another fails the knowledge about floating point.... When will they ever learn????? Edit: It seems to happen with any rounding around 0. If your result is not 0, the result is correctly rounded, but with values very near 0, it simply 'forgets'.... Edit 2: Press = again, the answer will be -2 as expected confirming the previous value is not rounded correctly, but still good enough due to its 'smallness' (e-39 is very small).

                                    ((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))

                                    modified on Monday, November 1, 2010 7:07 AM

                                    N Offline
                                    N Offline
                                    Nish Nishant
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #33

                                    It's still kinda ironic that cheap calculators from 20 years back will still display what the end-user wants to see, while a sophisticated OS comes with a calculator app that thinks it's okay to let its internal workings leak onto the UI.

                                    Regards, Nish


                                    My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Code Project Forums : New Posts Monitor This application monitors for new posts in the Code Project forums.

                                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • N Nish Nishant

                                      It's still kinda ironic that cheap calculators from 20 years back will still display what the end-user wants to see, while a sophisticated OS comes with a calculator app that thinks it's okay to let its internal workings leak onto the UI.

                                      Regards, Nish


                                      My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Code Project Forums : New Posts Monitor This application monitors for new posts in the Code Project forums.

                                      L Offline
                                      L Offline
                                      Lost User
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #34

                                      I still have my first calculator from around 30 years ago, still on its original battery. Still works but takes a good few seconds to respond to each key press. I also still have my alarm clock radio at the side of my bed that I got for my 8th birthday (28 years ago last month). Still keeps and displays perfect time although it is many years since I have tried the alarm or radio out.

                                      Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • R Roger Wright

                                        It's called rounding error, and the problem has been around since computers ran on vacuum tubes. The error has become smaller over the years as bits have been added to operands, but it still occurs due the fact that the finite representation of values which are not, in fact, expressible as a mantissa and a fixed length exponent, can contain a small error. It happens to be very noticeable around zero, but it's present in all FP calculations. It is for that reason programmers have been taught for decades never to use a comparison to zero when the control variable is calcuated using floating point math. It leads to expressions like:

                                        if ((x - k =< 0)|(x + k =< 0))
                                        {
                                        DoSomeThingUsefulBecauseXisZero();
                                        }

                                        The if argument tests for x = 0, +/- k, a constant value. It stumped me when I first saw it in missle guidance test code, until my boss reminded me of what I'd been taught in my only programming class a few years earlier - a bit embarrassing... :-O Have they finally stopped teaching this? :-D

                                        Will Rogers never met me.

                                        H Offline
                                        H Offline
                                        Hiren solanki
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #35

                                        Take a 5 for deep description.

                                        Rating is Always appreciated.
                                        Regards,
                                        Hiren Solanki.
                                        Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


                                        "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • H Hiren solanki

                                          Follow the procedure click '4' click 'sqrt' click '-'(Minus sign) click '2' Answer should be 0 But It comes back with '-8.1648465955514287168521180122928e-39' answer ;P [Edit] Tested with XP and Seven _[/More Edit] Windows Server 2008 R2 comes same with yet another answer '-1.068281969439142e-19' _[/More Edit] [/Edit]

                                          Rating is Always appreciated.
                                          Regards,
                                          Hiren Solanki.
                                          Indian Forum | My Articles | My Profile


                                          "You will always find me near 127.0.0.1"

                                          modified on Monday, November 1, 2010 7:00 AM

                                          E Offline
                                          E Offline
                                          Ennis Ray Lynch Jr
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #36

                                          Not a bug.

                                          Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. I also do Android Programming as I find it a refreshing break from the MS. "And they, since they Were not the one dead, turned to their affairs" -- Robert Frost

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups