@[email protected]M to Science [email protected]English • 11 days agoListen here, Little Dickymander.xyzimagemessage-square89fedilinkarrow-up1445
arrow-up1445imageListen here, Little Dickymander.xyz@[email protected]M to Science [email protected]English • 11 days agomessage-square89fedilink
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish5•10 days agoI mean as an engineer, this should actually be 2+2=4 +/-1.
minus-squareRoselinkfedilinkEnglish5•10 days agoComputer science: 2+2=4 (for integers at least; try this with floating point numbers at your own peril, you absolute fool)
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish1•10 days agocomparing floats for exact equality should be illegal, IMO
minus-squaresocsalinkfedilinkEnglish1•8 days agoFreshmen engineer: wow floating point numbers are great. Senior engineer: actually the distribution of floating point errors is mindfuck. Professional engineer: the mean error for all pairwaise 64 bit floating point operations is smaller than the Planck constant.
Engineer. 2+2=5+/-1
I mean as an engineer, this should actually be 2+2=4 +/-1.
Statistician: 1+1=sqrt(2)
pi*pi = g
units don’t match, though
Computer science: 2+2=4 (for integers at least; try this with floating point numbers at your own peril, you absolute fool)
comparing floats for exact equality should be illegal, IMO
0.1 + 0.2 = 0.30000000000000004
Freshmen engineer: wow floating point numbers are great.
Senior engineer: actually the distribution of floating point errors is mindfuck.
Professional engineer: the mean error for all pairwaise 64 bit floating point operations is smaller than the Planck constant.