# Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3337 mails)

< Previous | Next > |

##### Re: [SLE] Real Numbers representation in Tcl language

- From: Roger Oberholtzer <roger@xxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:53:57 +0200
- Message-id: <200604121653.57183.roger@xxxxxx>

On Wednesday 12 April 2006 07:43, Greg Wallace wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 11, 2006 @ 8:04 PM, Maura E. Monville wrote:

> >Is it possible that on a 32-bit machine the maximum value for a Real

> >number in Tcl language is 10^10 ?

> >

> >Instinctively I'd saythe number of bits assigned to the representation of

> >a Real number is independent on the machine h/w architecture ... but I'm

> >not familiar with Tcl and may be mistaken ...

> >

> >Thank you,

> >MEM

>

> Well, I'm just waging here, but in order to store an ordinate of 10, the

> computer would only need to have 4 bits assigned to store said ordinate.

> 10 would be 1010. I don't know anything about TCL language, but, if you

> can't store a number of that size, it's not a hardware issue, certainly not

> on a 32 bit machine. But it's pretty safe to say that the maximum ordinate

> is indeed dependent on machine architecture. I mean, if you have 64 bits

> available instead of 32, you can store both more precision and more order

> of magnitude than on a 32 bit machine. Now, whether the particular

> language you are coding in is aware of the fact that it has those extra

> bits to work with is a totally different matter.

Tcl simply uses the underlying machine's representation. No funny stuff. An

integer is 32 bits.

--

Roger Oberholtzer

OPQ Systems AB

> On Tuesday, April 11, 2006 @ 8:04 PM, Maura E. Monville wrote:

> >Is it possible that on a 32-bit machine the maximum value for a Real

> >number in Tcl language is 10^10 ?

> >

> >Instinctively I'd saythe number of bits assigned to the representation of

> >a Real number is independent on the machine h/w architecture ... but I'm

> >not familiar with Tcl and may be mistaken ...

> >

> >Thank you,

> >MEM

>

> Well, I'm just waging here, but in order to store an ordinate of 10, the

> computer would only need to have 4 bits assigned to store said ordinate.

> 10 would be 1010. I don't know anything about TCL language, but, if you

> can't store a number of that size, it's not a hardware issue, certainly not

> on a 32 bit machine. But it's pretty safe to say that the maximum ordinate

> is indeed dependent on machine architecture. I mean, if you have 64 bits

> available instead of 32, you can store both more precision and more order

> of magnitude than on a 32 bit machine. Now, whether the particular

> language you are coding in is aware of the fact that it has those extra

> bits to work with is a totally different matter.

Tcl simply uses the underlying machine's representation. No funny stuff. An

integer is 32 bits.

--

Roger Oberholtzer

OPQ Systems AB

< Previous | Next > |