This is a follow up post for this question.

1. I've decided to ditch my previous approach using Math.ulp() and adopt Tim Leek's suggestion: comparing ratios. In my updated code, I calculate both ratios and ensure that their difference from 1 is within the tolerance.
2. The flexibility of the class is still kept in mind; getters and setters have been added to compliment the private static tolerance values.
3. The constructor is made private to prevent instantiation (which I simply forgot about in the previous version).

Basically, I fix my code when someone manages to break it. Tom Leek opened my eyes. Spotted's answer was nice too, but it's too bad that it must be done in a slightly different way to ensure compilation. It was a nice feeling when I saw my code pass in the cases mentioned by Tom Leek.

This is a follow up post for this question.

1. I've decided to ditch my previous approach using Math.ulp() and adopt Tim Leek's suggestion: comparing ratios. In my updated code, I calculate both ratios and ensure that their difference from 1 is within the tolerance.
2. The flexibility of the class is still kept in mind; getters and setters have been added to compliment the private static tolerance values.
3. The constructor is made private to prevent instantiation (which I simply forgot about in the previous version).

Basically, I fix my code when someone manages to break it. Tom Leek opened my eyes. Spotted's answer was nice too, but it's too bad that it must be done in a slightly different way to ensure compilation. It was a nice feeling when I saw my code pass in the cases mentioned by Tom Leek.

This is a follow up post for this question.

This is a follow up post for this question.

This is a follow up post for this question .

1. I've decided to ditch my previous approach using Math.ulp() and adopt Tim Leek's suggestion: comparing ratios. In my updated code, I calculate both ratios and ensure that their difference from 1 is within the tolerance.
2. The flexibility of the class is still kept in mind; Getters and setters have been added to compliment the private static tolerance values.
3. The constructor is made private to prevent instantiation (which I simply forgot about in the previous version).

Basically, I fix my code when someone manages to break it. Tom Leek opened my eyes. Spotted's answer was nice too, but it's too bad that it must be done in a slightly different way to ensure compilation. It was a nice feeling when I saw my code pass in the cases mentioned my Tom Leek.

The above code runs without resulting in any assertion errors. (Yipee!!)

My request is simple: try breaking this one as well ;-)

This is a follow up post for this question .

1. I've decided to ditch my previous approach using Math.ulp() and adopt Tim Leek's suggestion: comparing ratios. In my updated code, I calculate both ratios and ensure that their difference from 1 is within the tolerance.
2. The flexibility of the class is still kept in mind; getters and setters have been added to compliment the private static tolerance values.
3. The constructor is made private to prevent instantiation (which I simply forgot about in the previous version).

Basically, I fix my code when someone manages to break it. Tom Leek opened my eyes. Spotted's answer was nice too, but it's too bad that it must be done in a slightly different way to ensure compilation. It was a nice feeling when I saw my code pass in the cases mentioned by Tom Leek.

The above code runs without resulting in any assertion errors. My request is simple: try breaking this one as well. ;-)