Related
The below algorithm works to identify a factor of a small number but fails completely when using a large one such as 7534534523.0
double result = 7; // 7534534523.0;
double divisor = 1;
for (int i = 2; i < result; i++){
double r = result / (double)i;
if (Math.floor(r) == r){
divisor = i;
break;
}
}
System.out.println(result + "/" + divisor + "=" + (result/divisor));
The number 7534534523.0 divided by 2 on a calculator can give a decimal part or round it (losing the 0.5). How can I perform such a check on large numbers? Do I have to use BigDecimal for this? Or is there another way?
If your goal is to represent a number with exactly n significant figures to the right of the decimal, BigDecimal is the class to use.
Immutable, arbitrary-precision signed decimal numbers. A BigDecimal consists of an arbitrary precision integer unscaled value and a 32-bit integer scale. If zero or positive, the scale is the number of digits to the right of the decimal point. If negative, the unscaled value of the number is multiplied by ten to the power of the negation of the scale. The value of the number represented by the BigDecimal is therefore (unscaledValue × 10-scale).
Additionally, you can have a better control over scale manipulation, rounding and format conversion.
I don't see what the problem is in your code. It works exactly like it should.
When I run your code I get this output:
7.534534523E9/77359.0=97397.0
That may have confused you, but its perfectly fine. It's just using scientific notation, but there is nothing wrong with that.
7.534534523E9 = 7.534534523 * 109 = 7,534,534,523
If you want to see it in normal notation, you can use System.out.format to print the result:
System.out.format("%.0f/%.0f=%.0f\n", result, divisor, result / divisor);
Shows:
7534534523/77359=97397
But you don't need double or BigDecimal to check if a number is divisible by another number. You can use the modulo operator on integral types to check if one number is divisible by another. As long as your numbers fit in a long, this works, otherwise you can move on to a BigInteger:
long result = 7534534523L;
long divisor = 1;
for (int i = 2; i < result; i++) {
if (result % i == 0) {
divisor = i;
break;
}
}
System.out.println(result + "/" + divisor + "=" + (result / divisor));
BigDecimal is the way to move ahead for preserving high precision in numbers.
DO NOT do not use constructor BigDecimal(double val) as the rounding is performed and the output is not always same. The same is mentioned in the implementation as well. According to it:
The results of this constructor can be somewhat unpredictable. One might assume that writing new BigDecimal(0.1) in Java creates a BigDecimal which is exactly equal to 0.1 (an unscaled value of 1, with a scale of 1), but it is actually equal to 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625. This is because 0.1 cannot be represented exactly as a double (or, for that matter, as a binary fraction of any finite length). Thus, the value that is being passed in to the constructor is not exactly equal to 0.1, appearances notwithstanding.
ALWAYS try to use constructor BigDecimal(String val) as it preserves precision and gives same output each time.
public class doublePrecision {
public static void main(String[] args) {
double total = 0;
total += 5.6;
total += 5.8;
System.out.println(total);
}
}
The above code prints:
11.399999999999
How would I get this to just print (or be able to use it as) 11.4?
As others have mentioned, you'll probably want to use the BigDecimal class, if you want to have an exact representation of 11.4.
Now, a little explanation into why this is happening:
The float and double primitive types in Java are floating point numbers, where the number is stored as a binary representation of a fraction and a exponent.
More specifically, a double-precision floating point value such as the double type is a 64-bit value, where:
1 bit denotes the sign (positive or negative).
11 bits for the exponent.
52 bits for the significant digits (the fractional part as a binary).
These parts are combined to produce a double representation of a value.
(Source: Wikipedia: Double precision)
For a detailed description of how floating point values are handled in Java, see the Section 4.2.3: Floating-Point Types, Formats, and Values of the Java Language Specification.
The byte, char, int, long types are fixed-point numbers, which are exact representions of numbers. Unlike fixed point numbers, floating point numbers will some times (safe to assume "most of the time") not be able to return an exact representation of a number. This is the reason why you end up with 11.399999999999 as the result of 5.6 + 5.8.
When requiring a value that is exact, such as 1.5 or 150.1005, you'll want to use one of the fixed-point types, which will be able to represent the number exactly.
As has been mentioned several times already, Java has a BigDecimal class which will handle very large numbers and very small numbers.
From the Java API Reference for the BigDecimal class:
Immutable,
arbitrary-precision signed decimal
numbers. A BigDecimal consists of an
arbitrary precision integer unscaled
value and a 32-bit integer scale. If
zero or positive, the scale is the
number of digits to the right of the
decimal point. If negative, the
unscaled value of the number is
multiplied by ten to the power of the
negation of the scale. The value of
the number represented by the
BigDecimal is therefore (unscaledValue
× 10^-scale).
There has been many questions on Stack Overflow relating to the matter of floating point numbers and its precision. Here is a list of related questions that may be of interest:
Why do I see a double variable initialized to some value like 21.4 as 21.399999618530273?
How to print really big numbers in C++
How is floating point stored? When does it matter?
Use Float or Decimal for Accounting Application Dollar Amount?
If you really want to get down to the nitty gritty details of floating point numbers, take a look at What Every Computer Scientist Should Know About Floating-Point Arithmetic.
When you input a double number, for example, 33.33333333333333, the value you get is actually the closest representable double-precision value, which is exactly:
33.3333333333333285963817615993320941925048828125
Dividing that by 100 gives:
0.333333333333333285963817615993320941925048828125
which also isn't representable as a double-precision number, so again it is rounded to the nearest representable value, which is exactly:
0.3333333333333332593184650249895639717578887939453125
When you print this value out, it gets rounded yet again to 17 decimal digits, giving:
0.33333333333333326
If you just want to process values as fractions, you can create a Fraction class which holds a numerator and denominator field.
Write methods for add, subtract, multiply and divide as well as a toDouble method. This way you can avoid floats during calculations.
EDIT: Quick implementation,
public class Fraction {
private int numerator;
private int denominator;
public Fraction(int n, int d){
numerator = n;
denominator = d;
}
public double toDouble(){
return ((double)numerator)/((double)denominator);
}
public static Fraction add(Fraction a, Fraction b){
if(a.denominator != b.denominator){
double aTop = b.denominator * a.numerator;
double bTop = a.denominator * b.numerator;
return new Fraction(aTop + bTop, a.denominator * b.denominator);
}
else{
return new Fraction(a.numerator + b.numerator, a.denominator);
}
}
public static Fraction divide(Fraction a, Fraction b){
return new Fraction(a.numerator * b.denominator, a.denominator * b.numerator);
}
public static Fraction multiply(Fraction a, Fraction b){
return new Fraction(a.numerator * b.numerator, a.denominator * b.denominator);
}
public static Fraction subtract(Fraction a, Fraction b){
if(a.denominator != b.denominator){
double aTop = b.denominator * a.numerator;
double bTop = a.denominator * b.numerator;
return new Fraction(aTop-bTop, a.denominator*b.denominator);
}
else{
return new Fraction(a.numerator - b.numerator, a.denominator);
}
}
}
Observe that you'd have the same problem if you used limited-precision decimal arithmetic, and wanted to deal with 1/3: 0.333333333 * 3 is 0.999999999, not 1.00000000.
Unfortunately, 5.6, 5.8 and 11.4 just aren't round numbers in binary, because they involve fifths. So the float representation of them isn't exact, just as 0.3333 isn't exactly 1/3.
If all the numbers you use are non-recurring decimals, and you want exact results, use BigDecimal. Or as others have said, if your values are like money in the sense that they're all a multiple of 0.01, or 0.001, or something, then multiply everything by a fixed power of 10 and use int or long (addition and subtraction are trivial: watch out for multiplication).
However, if you are happy with binary for the calculation, but you just want to print things out in a slightly friendlier format, try java.util.Formatter or String.format. In the format string specify a precision less than the full precision of a double. To 10 significant figures, say, 11.399999999999 is 11.4, so the result will be almost as accurate and more human-readable in cases where the binary result is very close to a value requiring only a few decimal places.
The precision to specify depends a bit on how much maths you've done with your numbers - in general the more you do, the more error will accumulate, but some algorithms accumulate it much faster than others (they're called "unstable" as opposed to "stable" with respect to rounding errors). If all you're doing is adding a few values, then I'd guess that dropping just one decimal place of precision will sort things out. Experiment.
You may want to look into using java's java.math.BigDecimal class if you really need precision math. Here is a good article from Oracle/Sun on the case for BigDecimal. While you can never represent 1/3 as someone mentioned, you can have the power to decide exactly how precise you want the result to be. setScale() is your friend.. :)
Ok, because I have way too much time on my hands at the moment here is a code example that relates to your question:
import java.math.BigDecimal;
/**
* Created by a wonderful programmer known as:
* Vincent Stoessel
* xaymaca#gmail.com
* on Mar 17, 2010 at 11:05:16 PM
*/
public class BigUp {
public static void main(String[] args) {
BigDecimal first, second, result ;
first = new BigDecimal("33.33333333333333") ;
second = new BigDecimal("100") ;
result = first.divide(second);
System.out.println("result is " + result);
//will print : result is 0.3333333333333333
}
}
and to plug my new favorite language, Groovy, here is a neater example of the same thing:
import java.math.BigDecimal
def first = new BigDecimal("33.33333333333333")
def second = new BigDecimal("100")
println "result is " + first/second // will print: result is 0.33333333333333
Pretty sure you could've made that into a three line example. :)
If you want exact precision, use BigDecimal. Otherwise, you can use ints multiplied by 10 ^ whatever precision you want.
As others have noted, not all decimal values can be represented as binary since decimal is based on powers of 10 and binary is based on powers of two.
If precision matters, use BigDecimal, but if you just want friendly output:
System.out.printf("%.2f\n", total);
Will give you:
11.40
You're running up against the precision limitation of type double.
Java.Math has some arbitrary-precision arithmetic facilities.
You can't, because 7.3 doesn't have a finite representation in binary. The closest you can get is 2054767329987789/2**48 = 7.3+1/1407374883553280.
Take a look at http://docs.python.org/tutorial/floatingpoint.html for a further explanation. (It's on the Python website, but Java and C++ have the same "problem".)
The solution depends on what exactly your problem is:
If it's that you just don't like seeing all those noise digits, then fix your string formatting. Don't display more than 15 significant digits (or 7 for float).
If it's that the inexactness of your numbers is breaking things like "if" statements, then you should write if (abs(x - 7.3) < TOLERANCE) instead of if (x == 7.3).
If you're working with money, then what you probably really want is decimal fixed point. Store an integer number of cents or whatever the smallest unit of your currency is.
(VERY UNLIKELY) If you need more than 53 significant bits (15-16 significant digits) of precision, then use a high-precision floating-point type, like BigDecimal.
private void getRound() {
// this is very simple and interesting
double a = 5, b = 3, c;
c = a / b;
System.out.println(" round val is " + c);
// round val is : 1.6666666666666667
// if you want to only two precision point with double we
// can use formate option in String
// which takes 2 parameters one is formte specifier which
// shows dicimal places another double value
String s = String.format("%.2f", c);
double val = Double.parseDouble(s);
System.out.println(" val is :" + val);
// now out put will be : val is :1.67
}
Use java.math.BigDecimal
Doubles are binary fractions internally, so they sometimes cannot represent decimal fractions to the exact decimal.
/*
0.8 1.2
0.7 1.3
0.7000000000000002 2.3
0.7999999999999998 4.2
*/
double adjust = fToInt + 1.0 - orgV;
// The following two lines works for me.
String s = String.format("%.2f", adjust);
double val = Double.parseDouble(s);
System.out.println(val); // output: 0.8, 0.7, 0.7, 0.8
Doubles are approximations of the decimal numbers in your Java source. You're seeing the consequence of the mismatch between the double (which is a binary-coded value) and your source (which is decimal-coded).
Java's producing the closest binary approximation. You can use the java.text.DecimalFormat to display a better-looking decimal value.
Short answer: Always use BigDecimal and make sure you are using the constructor with String argument, not the double one.
Back to your example, the following code will print 11.4, as you wish.
public class doublePrecision {
public static void main(String[] args) {
BigDecimal total = new BigDecimal("0");
total = total.add(new BigDecimal("5.6"));
total = total.add(new BigDecimal("5.8"));
System.out.println(total);
}
}
Multiply everything by 100 and store it in a long as cents.
Computers store numbers in binary and can't actually represent numbers such as 33.333333333 or 100.0 exactly. This is one of the tricky things about using doubles. You will have to just round the answer before showing it to a user. Luckily in most applications, you don't need that many decimal places anyhow.
Floating point numbers differ from real numbers in that for any given floating point number there is a next higher floating point number. Same as integers. There's no integer between 1 and 2.
There's no way to represent 1/3 as a float. There's a float below it and there's a float above it, and there's a certain distance between them. And 1/3 is in that space.
Apfloat for Java claims to work with arbitrary precision floating point numbers, but I've never used it. Probably worth a look.
http://www.apfloat.org/apfloat_java/
A similar question was asked here before
Java floating point high precision library
Use a BigDecimal. It even lets you specify rounding rules (like ROUND_HALF_EVEN, which will minimize statistical error by rounding to the even neighbor if both are the same distance; i.e. both 1.5 and 2.5 round to 2).
Why not use the round() method from Math class?
// The number of 0s determines how many digits you want after the floating point
// (here one digit)
total = (double)Math.round(total * 10) / 10;
System.out.println(total); // prints 11.4
Check out BigDecimal, it handles problems dealing with floating point arithmetic like that.
The new call would look like this:
term[number].coefficient.add(co);
Use setScale() to set the number of decimal place precision to be used.
If you have no choice other than using double values, can use the below code.
public static double sumDouble(double value1, double value2) {
double sum = 0.0;
String value1Str = Double.toString(value1);
int decimalIndex = value1Str.indexOf(".");
int value1Precision = 0;
if (decimalIndex != -1) {
value1Precision = (value1Str.length() - 1) - decimalIndex;
}
String value2Str = Double.toString(value2);
decimalIndex = value2Str.indexOf(".");
int value2Precision = 0;
if (decimalIndex != -1) {
value2Precision = (value2Str.length() - 1) - decimalIndex;
}
int maxPrecision = value1Precision > value2Precision ? value1Precision : value2Precision;
sum = value1 + value2;
String s = String.format("%." + maxPrecision + "f", sum);
sum = Double.parseDouble(s);
return sum;
}
You can Do the Following!
System.out.println(String.format("%.12f", total));
if you change the decimal value here %.12f
So far I understand it as main goal to get correct double from wrong double.
Look for my solution how to get correct value from "approximate" wrong value - if it is real floating point it rounds last digit - counted from all digits - counting before dot and try to keep max possible digits after dot - hope that it is enough precision for most cases:
public static double roundError(double value) {
BigDecimal valueBigDecimal = new BigDecimal(Double.toString(value));
String valueString = valueBigDecimal.toPlainString();
if (!valueString.contains(".")) return value;
String[] valueArray = valueString.split("[.]");
int places = 16;
places -= valueArray[0].length();
if ("56789".contains("" + valueArray[0].charAt(valueArray[0].length() - 1))) places--;
//System.out.println("Rounding " + value + "(" + valueString + ") to " + places + " places");
return valueBigDecimal.setScale(places, RoundingMode.HALF_UP).doubleValue();
}
I know it is long code, sure not best, maybe someone can fix it to be more elegant. Anyway it is working, see examples:
roundError(5.6+5.8) = 11.399999999999999 = 11.4
roundError(0.4-0.3) = 0.10000000000000003 = 0.1
roundError(37235.137567000005) = 37235.137567
roundError(1/3) 0.3333333333333333 = 0.333333333333333
roundError(3723513756.7000005) = 3.7235137567E9 (3723513756.7)
roundError(3723513756123.7000005) = 3.7235137561237E12 (3723513756123.7)
roundError(372351375612.7000005) = 3.723513756127E11 (372351375612.7)
roundError(1.7976931348623157) = 1.797693134862316
Do not waste your efford using BigDecimal. In 99.99999% cases you don't need it. java double type is of cource approximate but in almost all cases, it is sufficiently precise. Mind that your have an error at 14th significant digit. This is really negligible!
To get nice output use:
System.out.printf("%.2f\n", total);
like a decimal number 0.1, represented as binary 0.00011001100110011...., this is a infinite repeating number.
when I write code like this:
float f = 0.1f;
the program will rounding it as binary 0 01111011 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 101, this is not original number 0.1.
but when print this variable like this:
System.out.print(f);
I can get original number 0.1 rather than 0.100000001 or some other number. I think the program can't exactly represent "0.1", but it can display "0.1" exactly. How to do it?
I recover decimal number through add each bits of binary, it looks weird.
float f = (float) (Math.pow(2, -4) + Math.pow(2, -5) + Math.pow(2, -8) + Math.pow(2, -9) + Math.pow(2, -12) + Math.pow(2, -13) + Math.pow(2, -16) + Math.pow(2, -17) + Math.pow(2, -20) + Math.pow(2, -21) + Math.pow(2, -24) + Math.pow(2, -25));
float f2 = (float) Math.pow(2, -27);
System.out.println(f);
System.out.println(f2);
System.out.println(f + f2);
Output:
0.099999994
7.4505806E-9
0.1
in math, f1 + f2 = 0.100000001145... , not equals 0.1. Why the program would not get result like 0.100000001, I think it is more accurate.
Java's System.out.print prints just enough decimals that the resulting representation, if parsed as a double or float, converts to the original double or float value.
This is a good idea because it means that in a sense, no information is lost in this kind of conversion to decimal. On the other hand, it can give an impression of exactness which, as you make clear in your question, is wrong.
In other languages, you can print the exact decimal representation of the float or double being considered:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(){
printf("%.60f", 0.1);
}
result: 0.100000000000000005551115123125782702118158340454101562500000
In Java, in order to emulate the above behavior, you need to convert the float or double to BigDecimal (this conversion is exact) and then print the BigDecimal with enough digits. Java's attitude to floating-point-to-string-representing-a-decimal conversion is pervasive, so that even System.out.format is affected. The linked Java program, the important line of which is System.out.format("%.60f\n", 0.1);, shows 0.100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, although the value of 0.1d is not 0.10000000000000000000…, and a Java programmer could have been excused for expecting the same output as the C program.
To convert a double to a string that represents the exact value of the double, consider the hexadecimal format, that Java supports for literals and for printing.
I believe this is covered by Double.toString(double) (and similarly in Float#toString(float)):
How many digits must be printed for the fractional part of m or a? There must be at least one digit to represent the fractional part, and beyond that as many, but only as many, more digits as are needed to uniquely distinguish the argument value from adjacent values of type double. That is, suppose that x is the exact mathematical value represented by the decimal representation produced by this method for a finite nonzero argument d. Then d must be the double value nearest to x; or if two double values are equally close to x, then d must be one of them and the least significant bit of the significand of d must be 0.
(my emphasis)
Alternative wording: When will adding Double.MIN_VALUE to a double in Java not result in a different Double value? (See Jon Skeet's comment below)
This SO question about the minimum Double value in Java has some answers which seem to me to be equivalent. Jon Skeet's answer no doubt works but his explanation hasn't convinced me how it is different from Richard's answer.
Jon's answer uses the following:
double d = // your existing value;
long bits = Double.doubleToLongBits(d);
bits++;
d = Double.longBitsToDouble();
Richards answer mentions the JavaDoc for Double.MIN_VALUE
A constant holding the smallest
positive nonzero value of type double,
2-1074. It is equal to the hexadecimal
floating-point literal
0x0.0000000000001P-1022 and also equal
to Double.longBitsToDouble(0x1L).
My question is, how is Double.logBitsToDouble(0x1L) different from Jon's bits++;?
Jon's comment focuses on the basic floating point issue.
There's a difference between adding
Double.MIN_VALUE to a double value,
and incrementing the bit pattern
representing a double. They're
entirely different operations, due to
the way that floating point numbers
are stored. If you try to add a very
little number to a very big number,
the difference may well be so small
that the closest result is the same as
the original. Adding 1 to the current
bit pattern, however, will always
change the corresponding floating
point value, by the smallest possible
value which is visible at that scale.
I don't see any difference to Jon's approach of incrementing a long, "bits++", with adding Double.MIN_VALUE. When will they produce different results?
I wrote the following code to test the differences. Maybe someone could provide more/better sample double numbers or use a loop to find a number where there is a difference.
double d = 3.14159269123456789; // sample double
long bits = Double.doubleToLongBits(d);
long bitsBefore = bits;
bits++;
long bitsAfter = bits;
long bitsDiff = bitsAfter - bitsBefore;
long bitsMinValue = Double.doubleToLongBits(Double.MIN_VALUE);
long bitsSmallValue = Double.doubleToLongBits(Double.longBitsToDouble(0x1L));
if (bitsMinValue == bitsSmallValue)
{
System.out.println("Double.doubleToLongBits(0x1L) is same as Double.doubleToLongBits(Double.MIN_VALUE)");
}
if (bitsDiff == bitsMinValue)
{
System.out.println("bits++ increments the same amount as Double.MIN_VALUE");
}
if (bitsDiff == bitsMinValue)
{
d = d + Double.MIN_VALUE;
System.out.println("Using Double.MIN_VALUE");
}
else
{
d = Double.longBitsToDouble(bits);
System.out.println("Using doubleToLongBits/bits++");
}
System.out.println("bits before: " + bitsBefore);
System.out.println("bits after: " + bitsAfter);
System.out.println("bits diff: " + bitsDiff);
System.out.println("bits Min value: " + bitsMinValue);
System.out.println("bits Small value: " + bitsSmallValue);
OUTPUT:
Double.doubleToLongBits(Double.longBitsToDouble(0x1L)) is same as Double.doubleToLongBits(Double.MIN_VALUE)
bits++ increments the same amount as Double.MIN_VALUE
Using doubleToLongBits/bits++
bits before: 4614256656636814345
bits after: 4614256656636814346
bits diff: 1
bits Min value: 1
bits Small value: 1
Okay, let's imagine it this way, sticking with decimal numbers. Suppose you have a floating decimal point type which allows you to represent 5 decimal digits, and a number between 0 and 3 for the exponent, to multiple the result by 1, 10, 100 or 1000.
So the smallest non-zero value is just 1 (i.e. mantissa=00001, exponent=0). The largest value is 99999000 (mantissa=99999, exponent=3).
Now, what happens when you add 1 to 50000000? You can't represent 50000001...the next representable number after 500000000 is 50001000. So if you try to add them together, the result is just going to be the closest value to the "true" result - which is still 500000000. That's like adding Double.MIN_VALUE to a large double.
My version (converting to bits, incrementing and then converting back) is like taking that 50000000, splitting into mantissa and exponent (m=50000, e=3) then incrementing it the smallest amount, to (m=50001, e=3) and then reassembling to 50001000.
Do you see how they're different?
Now here's a concrete example:
public class Test{
public static void main(String[] args) {
double before = 100000000000000d;
double after = before + Double.MIN_VALUE;
System.out.println(before == after);
long bits = Double.doubleToLongBits(before);
bits++;
double afterBits = Double.longBitsToDouble(bits);
System.out.println(before == afterBits);
System.out.println(afterBits - before);
}
}
This tries both approaches with a large number. The output is:
true
false
0.015625
Going through the output, that means:
Adding Double.MIN_VALUE didn't have any effect
Incrementing the bit did have an effect
The difference between afterBits and before is 0.015625, which is much bigger than Double.MIN_VALUE. No wonder the simple addition had no effect!
It's exactly as Jon said:
"If you try to add a very little
number to a very big number, the
difference may well be so small that
the closest result is the same as the
original."
For example:
// True:
(Double.MAX_VALUE + Double.MIN_VALUE) == Double.MAX_VALUE
// False:
Double.longBitsToDouble(Double.doubleToLongBits(Double.MAX_VALUE) + 1) == Double.MAX_VALUE)
MIN_VALUE is the smallest representable positive double, but that certainly does not imply that adding it to an arbitrary double results in a unequal one.
In contrast, adding 1 to the underlying bits results in a new bit pattern, and thus does result in a unequal double.
public class doublePrecision {
public static void main(String[] args) {
double total = 0;
total += 5.6;
total += 5.8;
System.out.println(total);
}
}
The above code prints:
11.399999999999
How would I get this to just print (or be able to use it as) 11.4?
As others have mentioned, you'll probably want to use the BigDecimal class, if you want to have an exact representation of 11.4.
Now, a little explanation into why this is happening:
The float and double primitive types in Java are floating point numbers, where the number is stored as a binary representation of a fraction and a exponent.
More specifically, a double-precision floating point value such as the double type is a 64-bit value, where:
1 bit denotes the sign (positive or negative).
11 bits for the exponent.
52 bits for the significant digits (the fractional part as a binary).
These parts are combined to produce a double representation of a value.
(Source: Wikipedia: Double precision)
For a detailed description of how floating point values are handled in Java, see the Section 4.2.3: Floating-Point Types, Formats, and Values of the Java Language Specification.
The byte, char, int, long types are fixed-point numbers, which are exact representions of numbers. Unlike fixed point numbers, floating point numbers will some times (safe to assume "most of the time") not be able to return an exact representation of a number. This is the reason why you end up with 11.399999999999 as the result of 5.6 + 5.8.
When requiring a value that is exact, such as 1.5 or 150.1005, you'll want to use one of the fixed-point types, which will be able to represent the number exactly.
As has been mentioned several times already, Java has a BigDecimal class which will handle very large numbers and very small numbers.
From the Java API Reference for the BigDecimal class:
Immutable,
arbitrary-precision signed decimal
numbers. A BigDecimal consists of an
arbitrary precision integer unscaled
value and a 32-bit integer scale. If
zero or positive, the scale is the
number of digits to the right of the
decimal point. If negative, the
unscaled value of the number is
multiplied by ten to the power of the
negation of the scale. The value of
the number represented by the
BigDecimal is therefore (unscaledValue
× 10^-scale).
There has been many questions on Stack Overflow relating to the matter of floating point numbers and its precision. Here is a list of related questions that may be of interest:
Why do I see a double variable initialized to some value like 21.4 as 21.399999618530273?
How to print really big numbers in C++
How is floating point stored? When does it matter?
Use Float or Decimal for Accounting Application Dollar Amount?
If you really want to get down to the nitty gritty details of floating point numbers, take a look at What Every Computer Scientist Should Know About Floating-Point Arithmetic.
When you input a double number, for example, 33.33333333333333, the value you get is actually the closest representable double-precision value, which is exactly:
33.3333333333333285963817615993320941925048828125
Dividing that by 100 gives:
0.333333333333333285963817615993320941925048828125
which also isn't representable as a double-precision number, so again it is rounded to the nearest representable value, which is exactly:
0.3333333333333332593184650249895639717578887939453125
When you print this value out, it gets rounded yet again to 17 decimal digits, giving:
0.33333333333333326
If you just want to process values as fractions, you can create a Fraction class which holds a numerator and denominator field.
Write methods for add, subtract, multiply and divide as well as a toDouble method. This way you can avoid floats during calculations.
EDIT: Quick implementation,
public class Fraction {
private int numerator;
private int denominator;
public Fraction(int n, int d){
numerator = n;
denominator = d;
}
public double toDouble(){
return ((double)numerator)/((double)denominator);
}
public static Fraction add(Fraction a, Fraction b){
if(a.denominator != b.denominator){
double aTop = b.denominator * a.numerator;
double bTop = a.denominator * b.numerator;
return new Fraction(aTop + bTop, a.denominator * b.denominator);
}
else{
return new Fraction(a.numerator + b.numerator, a.denominator);
}
}
public static Fraction divide(Fraction a, Fraction b){
return new Fraction(a.numerator * b.denominator, a.denominator * b.numerator);
}
public static Fraction multiply(Fraction a, Fraction b){
return new Fraction(a.numerator * b.numerator, a.denominator * b.denominator);
}
public static Fraction subtract(Fraction a, Fraction b){
if(a.denominator != b.denominator){
double aTop = b.denominator * a.numerator;
double bTop = a.denominator * b.numerator;
return new Fraction(aTop-bTop, a.denominator*b.denominator);
}
else{
return new Fraction(a.numerator - b.numerator, a.denominator);
}
}
}
Observe that you'd have the same problem if you used limited-precision decimal arithmetic, and wanted to deal with 1/3: 0.333333333 * 3 is 0.999999999, not 1.00000000.
Unfortunately, 5.6, 5.8 and 11.4 just aren't round numbers in binary, because they involve fifths. So the float representation of them isn't exact, just as 0.3333 isn't exactly 1/3.
If all the numbers you use are non-recurring decimals, and you want exact results, use BigDecimal. Or as others have said, if your values are like money in the sense that they're all a multiple of 0.01, or 0.001, or something, then multiply everything by a fixed power of 10 and use int or long (addition and subtraction are trivial: watch out for multiplication).
However, if you are happy with binary for the calculation, but you just want to print things out in a slightly friendlier format, try java.util.Formatter or String.format. In the format string specify a precision less than the full precision of a double. To 10 significant figures, say, 11.399999999999 is 11.4, so the result will be almost as accurate and more human-readable in cases where the binary result is very close to a value requiring only a few decimal places.
The precision to specify depends a bit on how much maths you've done with your numbers - in general the more you do, the more error will accumulate, but some algorithms accumulate it much faster than others (they're called "unstable" as opposed to "stable" with respect to rounding errors). If all you're doing is adding a few values, then I'd guess that dropping just one decimal place of precision will sort things out. Experiment.
You may want to look into using java's java.math.BigDecimal class if you really need precision math. Here is a good article from Oracle/Sun on the case for BigDecimal. While you can never represent 1/3 as someone mentioned, you can have the power to decide exactly how precise you want the result to be. setScale() is your friend.. :)
Ok, because I have way too much time on my hands at the moment here is a code example that relates to your question:
import java.math.BigDecimal;
/**
* Created by a wonderful programmer known as:
* Vincent Stoessel
* xaymaca#gmail.com
* on Mar 17, 2010 at 11:05:16 PM
*/
public class BigUp {
public static void main(String[] args) {
BigDecimal first, second, result ;
first = new BigDecimal("33.33333333333333") ;
second = new BigDecimal("100") ;
result = first.divide(second);
System.out.println("result is " + result);
//will print : result is 0.3333333333333333
}
}
and to plug my new favorite language, Groovy, here is a neater example of the same thing:
import java.math.BigDecimal
def first = new BigDecimal("33.33333333333333")
def second = new BigDecimal("100")
println "result is " + first/second // will print: result is 0.33333333333333
Pretty sure you could've made that into a three line example. :)
If you want exact precision, use BigDecimal. Otherwise, you can use ints multiplied by 10 ^ whatever precision you want.
As others have noted, not all decimal values can be represented as binary since decimal is based on powers of 10 and binary is based on powers of two.
If precision matters, use BigDecimal, but if you just want friendly output:
System.out.printf("%.2f\n", total);
Will give you:
11.40
You're running up against the precision limitation of type double.
Java.Math has some arbitrary-precision arithmetic facilities.
You can't, because 7.3 doesn't have a finite representation in binary. The closest you can get is 2054767329987789/2**48 = 7.3+1/1407374883553280.
Take a look at http://docs.python.org/tutorial/floatingpoint.html for a further explanation. (It's on the Python website, but Java and C++ have the same "problem".)
The solution depends on what exactly your problem is:
If it's that you just don't like seeing all those noise digits, then fix your string formatting. Don't display more than 15 significant digits (or 7 for float).
If it's that the inexactness of your numbers is breaking things like "if" statements, then you should write if (abs(x - 7.3) < TOLERANCE) instead of if (x == 7.3).
If you're working with money, then what you probably really want is decimal fixed point. Store an integer number of cents or whatever the smallest unit of your currency is.
(VERY UNLIKELY) If you need more than 53 significant bits (15-16 significant digits) of precision, then use a high-precision floating-point type, like BigDecimal.
private void getRound() {
// this is very simple and interesting
double a = 5, b = 3, c;
c = a / b;
System.out.println(" round val is " + c);
// round val is : 1.6666666666666667
// if you want to only two precision point with double we
// can use formate option in String
// which takes 2 parameters one is formte specifier which
// shows dicimal places another double value
String s = String.format("%.2f", c);
double val = Double.parseDouble(s);
System.out.println(" val is :" + val);
// now out put will be : val is :1.67
}
Use java.math.BigDecimal
Doubles are binary fractions internally, so they sometimes cannot represent decimal fractions to the exact decimal.
/*
0.8 1.2
0.7 1.3
0.7000000000000002 2.3
0.7999999999999998 4.2
*/
double adjust = fToInt + 1.0 - orgV;
// The following two lines works for me.
String s = String.format("%.2f", adjust);
double val = Double.parseDouble(s);
System.out.println(val); // output: 0.8, 0.7, 0.7, 0.8
Doubles are approximations of the decimal numbers in your Java source. You're seeing the consequence of the mismatch between the double (which is a binary-coded value) and your source (which is decimal-coded).
Java's producing the closest binary approximation. You can use the java.text.DecimalFormat to display a better-looking decimal value.
Short answer: Always use BigDecimal and make sure you are using the constructor with String argument, not the double one.
Back to your example, the following code will print 11.4, as you wish.
public class doublePrecision {
public static void main(String[] args) {
BigDecimal total = new BigDecimal("0");
total = total.add(new BigDecimal("5.6"));
total = total.add(new BigDecimal("5.8"));
System.out.println(total);
}
}
Multiply everything by 100 and store it in a long as cents.
Computers store numbers in binary and can't actually represent numbers such as 33.333333333 or 100.0 exactly. This is one of the tricky things about using doubles. You will have to just round the answer before showing it to a user. Luckily in most applications, you don't need that many decimal places anyhow.
Floating point numbers differ from real numbers in that for any given floating point number there is a next higher floating point number. Same as integers. There's no integer between 1 and 2.
There's no way to represent 1/3 as a float. There's a float below it and there's a float above it, and there's a certain distance between them. And 1/3 is in that space.
Apfloat for Java claims to work with arbitrary precision floating point numbers, but I've never used it. Probably worth a look.
http://www.apfloat.org/apfloat_java/
A similar question was asked here before
Java floating point high precision library
Use a BigDecimal. It even lets you specify rounding rules (like ROUND_HALF_EVEN, which will minimize statistical error by rounding to the even neighbor if both are the same distance; i.e. both 1.5 and 2.5 round to 2).
Why not use the round() method from Math class?
// The number of 0s determines how many digits you want after the floating point
// (here one digit)
total = (double)Math.round(total * 10) / 10;
System.out.println(total); // prints 11.4
Check out BigDecimal, it handles problems dealing with floating point arithmetic like that.
The new call would look like this:
term[number].coefficient.add(co);
Use setScale() to set the number of decimal place precision to be used.
If you have no choice other than using double values, can use the below code.
public static double sumDouble(double value1, double value2) {
double sum = 0.0;
String value1Str = Double.toString(value1);
int decimalIndex = value1Str.indexOf(".");
int value1Precision = 0;
if (decimalIndex != -1) {
value1Precision = (value1Str.length() - 1) - decimalIndex;
}
String value2Str = Double.toString(value2);
decimalIndex = value2Str.indexOf(".");
int value2Precision = 0;
if (decimalIndex != -1) {
value2Precision = (value2Str.length() - 1) - decimalIndex;
}
int maxPrecision = value1Precision > value2Precision ? value1Precision : value2Precision;
sum = value1 + value2;
String s = String.format("%." + maxPrecision + "f", sum);
sum = Double.parseDouble(s);
return sum;
}
You can Do the Following!
System.out.println(String.format("%.12f", total));
if you change the decimal value here %.12f
So far I understand it as main goal to get correct double from wrong double.
Look for my solution how to get correct value from "approximate" wrong value - if it is real floating point it rounds last digit - counted from all digits - counting before dot and try to keep max possible digits after dot - hope that it is enough precision for most cases:
public static double roundError(double value) {
BigDecimal valueBigDecimal = new BigDecimal(Double.toString(value));
String valueString = valueBigDecimal.toPlainString();
if (!valueString.contains(".")) return value;
String[] valueArray = valueString.split("[.]");
int places = 16;
places -= valueArray[0].length();
if ("56789".contains("" + valueArray[0].charAt(valueArray[0].length() - 1))) places--;
//System.out.println("Rounding " + value + "(" + valueString + ") to " + places + " places");
return valueBigDecimal.setScale(places, RoundingMode.HALF_UP).doubleValue();
}
I know it is long code, sure not best, maybe someone can fix it to be more elegant. Anyway it is working, see examples:
roundError(5.6+5.8) = 11.399999999999999 = 11.4
roundError(0.4-0.3) = 0.10000000000000003 = 0.1
roundError(37235.137567000005) = 37235.137567
roundError(1/3) 0.3333333333333333 = 0.333333333333333
roundError(3723513756.7000005) = 3.7235137567E9 (3723513756.7)
roundError(3723513756123.7000005) = 3.7235137561237E12 (3723513756123.7)
roundError(372351375612.7000005) = 3.723513756127E11 (372351375612.7)
roundError(1.7976931348623157) = 1.797693134862316
Do not waste your efford using BigDecimal. In 99.99999% cases you don't need it. java double type is of cource approximate but in almost all cases, it is sufficiently precise. Mind that your have an error at 14th significant digit. This is really negligible!
To get nice output use:
System.out.printf("%.2f\n", total);