Bankers Rounding
-
For the record, the NYSE no longer trades in fractional representations, and hasn't for quite some time, so Giordy can drop that one from his bag of dime-store tricks.
-
Also, Sergiy, we have proved that using the Banker Round function is valid, and the proof is posted in this thread. You won't admit it.
Again, thanks to David M. for doing the work in coding Sergiy's test!
-
Exactly!
But did you get what you just said?
Number 0.125 shows that you've got enough for 0.125 but not enough for 0.126.
The real value behind that number is somewhere between 0.125 and 0.126.
Any of the values from this range (infinite number of values) must be rounded to 0.13.
Which shows that BR provides wrong result.
Hope it helped.
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator -
And the choice of what rounding function to use is a BUSINESS DECISION based on the requirements of the project.
-
Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is no last "9" in the number .999...
That's kind of the point of those three dots.
I know, I know, Giordy. Everyone else is wrong, but you are right.
Remember earlier when I showed you what I guessed you were using to drill that hole you are digging for yourself? I think I was mistaken, as you must be using this.
-
Thank you Lynn.
Business decisions is the directive here, not real world.
N 56°04'39.16"
E 12°55'05.25" -
Hell, that's not even true using your methodology. The real value behind 0.125 according to you should actually be somewhere between 0.124 and 0.126, so you would round it up to 0.13 or down to 0.12
-
JacekO, it's you who cannot get the point for such a long time.
Did you answer for youself the question about midnight event?
It's everything what happened between "zero" moment of time and next tick of the clock. How long does it takes depends on precision of the clock you use to measure time.
The same logic applied here: what amount $0.25 means? It means value more than 0.25 but less than 0.26 (when the next "tick" happens).
Half of this value is more than 0.125 but less than 0.130.
For all numbers from this range rounding up is more accurate than rounding down.
That's why BR should not be used.
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator -
"Yes, I can specify infinite number of zeros before 1, this is exactly how infinity works."
No you can't, because that is how infinity works. .0~ never ends, therefore there is no place to put that "1" at the end. Feel free to show me a cite that proves me wrong.
There are an infinite amount of numbers between 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000<keep inserting as many zeroes as you want here>00000000000000000000000000000000001 and 0, while there are exactly zero numbers between 0.999... and 1.
-
"Istead of repeating time after time that I'm wrong try to prove it at least once."
That's been done an almost infinite number of times in this thread, including once using a test scenario provided by you specifically. The number of times that you have been proven right is precisely 0.000...
-
Whoo-hoo!
Finally you agreed that there is no such thing as precise number!
Every "precise" number is an expression of infinite approximation from the range of infinite number of values.
Well done!
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator -
And yet you are still wrong. There is precisely only 1 of you. I can precisely count the number of apples in the fruit basket on my kitchen table, or the number of tomatoes in our refrigerator. It doesn't matter if they are of slightly different sizes, shapes, colors or even types (unless I wish to differentuate between Golden Delicious or Granny Smith regarding the apples).
-
Are you talking about counting units or rounding shares?
It does not require any rounding until you start share.
But what do you share?
0.125 of apple - what does it mean? 0.125 of it's volume? Of it's mass? Or it's cost?
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator -
I have been right. You must always be right, and everyone else is wrong. Perhaps we should call you Pope Sergiy, as you are definately acting like the Catholic Church; completely unwilling to admit when you are wrong and dragging us all off on tangents that have had nothing to do with the original topic or challenge that you brought up regarding the validity of the Bankers Round function.
-
I agreed with no such thing. I simply stated that there is no last "9" in .999...
On the other hand, there is a last "9" in .999999999999.
This really isn't rocket science.
Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 373 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply