patch ping Re: [java] Fix BigDecimal ROUND_HALF_EVEN
Jerry Quinn
jlquinn@optonline.net
Tue Jul 1 01:54:00 GMT 2003
Hey, folks. Could someone take at this? I had posted a modified
patch for fixing the above in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q2/msg00392.html
BTW, I was unable to get mauve snapshot running. It wouldn't
configure at all for me.
Thanks,
Jerry Quinn
Per Bothner writes:
> Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> >>>>>>"Jerry" == Jerry Quinn <jlquinn@optonline.net> writes:
> >
> >
> > Jerry> The following program should output 0.21 after scaling, but
> > Jerry> outputs 0.20. The attached patch fixes the bug.
> >
> > I don't know this code very well, so I'm reluctant to approve the
> > patch. Per, could you look at it?
>
> I can't say I understand the code very well either.
> The test for 'roundDigit > 5' in case ROUND_HALF_DOWN
> looks suspicious also.
>
> It might be possible to simplify and optimize the code.
> I'd remove the "+ 1" in the setting of 'power', and
> then just set unrounded to to parts[0]. I'd drop
> roundDigit, whihc which makes me feel very uncomfortable,
> and just compare the remainder (parts[1]) with valIntVal:
>
> For simplicity, assume all the numbers are positive.
> Then for ROUND_FLOOR or ROUND_DOWN, ignore the remainer.
> Then for ROUND_CEILING, ROUND_UP, add one to unrounded
> iff the remainder is non-zero.
>
> Otherwise, double the remainder, and compare it with valIntVal.
> If the doubled remainder is less than valIntVal, ignore it.
> If it is greater, treat as ROUND_UP. If it is equal,
> it depends on the rounding mode in the obvious manner.
>
> Adjust as appropriate if this and/or val are negative.
>
> Does this logic seem correct? If so, do we have a volunteer
> to try implementing (and testing) it?
> --
> --Per Bothner
> per@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/
>
>
More information about the Java
mailing list