Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ArithmeticException: Rounding necessary [closed] - java

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
when i try to get the longValueExact() :
BigDecimal bigDecimal = new BigDecimal(432.900).divide(new BigDecimal(1), 2, RoundingMode.FLOOR);
System.out.println(bigDecimal.longValueExact());
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ArithmeticException: Rounding necessary
at java.math.BigDecimal.commonNeedIncrement(BigDecimal.java:4151)
at java.math.BigDecimal.needIncrement(BigDecimal.java:4207)
at java.math.BigDecimal.divideAndRound(BigDecimal.java:4115)
at java.math.BigDecimal.setScale(BigDecimal.java:2455)
at java.math.BigDecimal.longValueExact(BigDecimal.java:3093)
at com.tessi.bmd.specific.actil.utils.ActilUtils.main(ActilUtils.java:1281)

new BigDecimal(432.900)
This is a bad idea. 432.900 is a double literal and is therefore highly unlikely to actually represent 432.900. You're using BigDecimal, so presumably you know that there are only at most 2^64 numbers in existence that are exactly representable by a double. 432.900 is not one of them. Do not use this constructor - it has warnings all over it. Use new BigDecimal("432.9").
.divide(new BigDecimal(1),
Okay, divide by 1, not going to do anything. Also, use BigDecimal.ONE for this.
The value is still 432.899999999999434 or whatnot.
System.out.println(bigDecimal.longValueExact());
Of course that doesn't work - a long value can only hold integral values, and 432.9 (or something close to that) isn't.
Are you perhaps thinking that 432.900 is just a way of writing 432900 that is more readable to humans from certain locales where . is used as thousands separator?
. is the decimals separator. 432.900 is a double literal that represents the nearest representable double to the number 432 + 9/10ths. If that's your intend, remove the . - if you want to create some horizontal space for the yes, use _ which is legal in number literals and meaningless.
If that's not your problem and you really want 432.9 as an exact long - I guess, go back to square one and start learning java. Soon (as in, within a day or two, no doubt) you'll hit the part of the tutorial that explains the primitive data types. Pay extra attention to this section.

It is the normal behavior because the value you want to display as a long has decimal part (432.89, not 432.90 due to instatiating BigDecimal from a double) so is not an interger number. From the javadoc:
Converts this BigDecimal to a long, checking for lost information. If
this BigDecimal has a nonzero fractional part or is out of the
possible range for a long result then an ArithmeticException is
thrown.

Related

Casting primitive types [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed last month.
Improve this question
I investigated a lot about this but I didn't find an answer that convinces me; for that reason I decided to ask it here.
When you do casting, what occurs internally with the compiler? For example:
double b= 5.67
a = (int) b
Does java convert the type of the variable or converts the internal value of?
Normally, the Java compiler will prevent you from assigning primitives that might result in a loss of data. You don't make it clear, but I am assuming that a is an int. Assigning a double to an int can result in information being lost, so the compiler objects.
If you add a cast the compiler ignores the issue and adds code to do whatever is necessary to convert the value from one type to the value of the other (in this case, assuming a is an int, simply truncating the double in many cases) and ignores any data loss. The type of the variables remains unchanged. Only the value changes.
There is a bit more to it than that for certain values. For example, if the double has the special value NaN (not a number) it is converted to int 0. See in the Java Specification 5.1.3. Narrowing Primitive Conversion.

Algorithm for finding a single number to represent two different numerical scales? [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm looking for an algorithm to combine two values;
Where the first value indicates a positive result when the value is higher. For example, 0.98 is 'good' and 0.15 is 'bad'.
Where the second value indicates a positive result when the value is lower. For example, 10,000 is 'bad', whereas 1000 is 'good'.
I need a method of determining a value that can represent both of these scales with one number, so that I can sort my findings on my application from high to low accordingly. I'm not sure if anyone knows of such an algorithm, or any advice, but any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you.
P.S. I am aware I can 'negate' one of the two values, to have them appear on a similar scale, however I'm not sure how this would work in Java.
EDIT: Sorry, so to elaborate, I'm sorting images based on similarity to a user input image. Each of my algorithms that I'm using to return a value of similarity, function on a different scale. The first being a value between 0.00 and 1.00, with numbers being closer to 1.00, indicating the image is more similar to the original. Whereas, my second algorithm returns values from 1000+, with higher values indicating the image is less similar to the original. I need to take these two values and combine them to allow me to sort the resulting images in order of similarity, with the most similar image being shown at the top of my list, and the least similar at the bottom. Hopefully this helps clear up any confusion. Thanks again.
If your only goal is sorting, you need to come up with a function g(x,y) that represents the "goodness" of your pair of values. A pair (x1,y1) is better than (x2,y2) if and only if g(x1,y1) > g(x2,y2).
The function must represent what you consider "good". A simple example would be:
g(x,y) = x - y / 10000

Why we don't see much use of BigInteger? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm a beginner in java and our professor avoided discussing BinInteger and BigDecimal classes from java.math package.I wonder why.Are they not that useful?When exactly we must need to use BigInteger?
You don't need them particularly often, but when you do need them you really need them. You really only need them when you need to actually store arbitrary precision integers or real numbers. long goes up to 263-1, which is a pretty big number.
Always use the primitives when possible because:
They have operators rather than methods, so code is easier to read/write.
They are a lot more efficient.
long, the largest primitive integer type, has a maximum value of 9,223,372,036,854,775,807, or 2^63 - 1, and a minimum value of -2^63.
double, the most precise primitive floating point type, has 64 bits of precision, which is a lot.
However, if you really need an arbitrarily large/small integer or arbitrarily precise decimal number, the BigInteger and BigDecimal types are appropriate. Such scenarios aren't that common, however, which is probably why your professor didn't discuss these types.
Decimal data types are essential when dealing with currencies
The primitive types of int and long have a limited range of values they can represent. The same is true for the floating point primitives float and double. There however you also face the issue of a limited precision. For many cases this does not pose any problem however when larger numbers or exact precision is required (e.g. in a banking application you will want to be as precise as possible) you will use BigInteger and BigDecimal however.
BIGINT is always the product of two Ints.
Example 99X99 = 10000 upto twice as big.
Both of the libraries you mentioned has their uses, if they didn't they wouldn't exist. However, your teacher probably elected not to discuss them as you probably wont be using them in your specific course. (He has to put a limit somewhere, you cannot cover the entirety of Java libs in one course.)

Why does math.sqrt return a float to one decimal point and not just the value wo the decimal point? [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm not sure if this question has been answered(couldn't find it when I did a google search).
I saw http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/lang/Math.html that the math class square root method returns a double. I experimented with it in eclipse with some ints that have whole square roots - 4, 9 and found that the square root with those always returned a floating point value with one decimal - 4.0, 9.0. I was curious as to why it even returned that extra decimal? I thought that ints could be considered as double values too. To me returning just 1 makes more sense cause you conserve more memory(i guess more memory is needed to store that extra decimal point) I even tested it out
public static double control(){
return 1;
}
and saw it was valid to just return 1.
[I] found that [Math.sqrt(x) where x is a perfect square] always returned a floating point value with one decimal.
You are mistaking a particular printed representation of a double value with the value itself. A double does not have a decimal point. A double is a bit pattern that represents a particular real number (4 for example).
Decimal points only appear in a particuular decimal representation of real numbers. If I write "0.25", that obviously has a decimal point. If I write "1/4", there is no decimal point. But those are just two different representations of the same real number. So is the particular bit pattern that represents the double value returned by the Java expression, 1.0/4.0.
I don't know why Double.toString(4) returns the string, "4.0" instead of returning "4", but I'm guessing that somebody wanted to make it consistent with numeric literals in the Java language. When a "4" appears in your program, that's an int literal, and when "4.0" appears in your program, that's a double literal.
That method returns a double. It's going to display as a double because of the return type the method is set to. There is a solution to this here on stackoverflow to return the in if it's say 4.0 and show the double if it isn't. Solution on stackoverflow

Rationale behind methods that convert values [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
What is the purpose of having methods converting one value into another value of a different type. For example a method that converts a string of digits into an int and another method converting an int into a string of digits? What exactly would be the advantages to doing one over the other? Is it there is no advantage and the methods for conversion exist only to provide compatible values for the arguments of the constructors of different classes?
Simply, it's because those different types exhibit different behaviors:
String str = "42";
System.out.println(str + 1);
System.out.println(Integer.parseInt(str) + 1);
421
43
You need to have methods like Integer.parseInt() if you want to perform normal addition as opposed to string concatenation, for example.
A tangible example of this can come up when you read a number as input from a user; more often than not you will want to treat this number as a number (double, int, etc.) as opposed to a string.
The different forms serve different purposes beyond providing compatible values for methods and constructors.
For the int type, mathematical operations are most easily performed on this type (and similar primitive types). User input is usually given in the form of a String, so to perform a mathematical operation on user input, one must convert it into an int (or a double, long, float, byte, or short as appropriate).
For converting to a String: This is how numerical output is displayed. We may code System.out.println(myInt);, but behind the scenes, Java is converting the number to a String for display purposes.
Since you used the "Java" tag, I'll answer you regarding java.
It is because, Java was written this way . There are languages that do not need types (lisp for example) and you can read a string (from Std. In) and raise it to a power (for example) if it is a number. But Java needs types. The compiler wants to know it ahead.
One useful advantage of being able to convert numbers to string is that you are able to use very large numbers, storing them as strings, instead of integers. However you cannot work with strings when you use the regular operators (+,-,*,/).
Another advantage: when you have a TextField and you read user input, it is given as a string. So you need to get a number out of it to work with it.

Categories

Resources