<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED NOTABUG - Calculation involing some decimals return incorrect floats with 12 d.p." href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128312#c7">Comment # 7</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED NOTABUG - Calculation involing some decimals return incorrect floats with 12 d.p." href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128312">bug 128312</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:newbie-02@gmx.de" title="b. <newbie-02@gmx.de>"> b.</a> <pre>Now i'm getting a little frustrated ... these wrong calculations are! mistakes! period, duplicate ans 'NOTABUG' is misleading, they are errors because calc - and other spreadsheets? - give results that are not mathematically correct. one might discuss whether they are unsolvable errors and leave them as they are, but one shouldn't try to convince normal people with normal mathematical education that they are not errors. This will always and again cause endless discussions. ex$el and g$$gle have - according to comments in other threads - at least partially concealed the problem with rounding, @Mike has fixed a variant / consequence of these rounding errors in #129606, so improvements are! possible. i had suggested to check an eventually fundamental improvement in #130221 - allegedly the IEEE has taken the problem into account and with the IEEE standards 754-2008 and 754-2019 allows to calculate decimal numbers without rounding errors - imho it is worth at least a check or test if: - something like this could be implemented, maybe in future releases, and - if calc and the developers can get out of many stupid requests that way, and - whether calc could positively distinguish itself from other spreadsheets by solving this issue. or if Mike's improvement from #129606 can be used for other cases as well ... the practice of dismissing any suggestion for improvement as a duplicate of old bugs (that no developer will look at anymore because they are grown too long and perhaps awkwardly presented at first), i feel to be ... suboptimal. it continues to provide the 'administrators' with a lot of administrative work, yes, but it doesn't move the project forward. see there: <a href="http://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=157453">http://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=157453</a> a sheet with errors and the improvements by @Mike from #129606, and there: <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED DUPLICATE - calculation: problems with accuracy of 'decimal values', which IEEE format is used by calc?" href="show_bug.cgi?id=130221#c0">https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=130221#c0</a> something about old IEEE 754 not! being the last in possibilities i'd like if someone reopens this bug, or points to another place where the issue can be discussed in depth ... reg. b.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>