an illustration of the disconnect between the way Pd represents floats verus

what happens in the implementation, following the discussion in bug #1996275

https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1996275&group_id=55736&atid=478070


svn path=/trunk/; revision=10213

1 files changed, 22 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/additional/messageoddness/float-precision-misrepresentation.pd b/doc/additional/messageoddness/float-precision-misrepresentation.pd
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c0d130f5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/additional/messageoddness/float-precision-misrepresentation.pd
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+#N canvas 389 283 450 300 10;
+#X msg 173 54 0.999999;
+#X obj 173 86 + 9e-07;
+#X floatatom 164 184 9 0 0 0 - - -;
+#X obj 135 215 pddp/print;
+#X obj 112 245 nbx 5 14 -1e+37 1e+37 0 0 empty empty empty 0 -8 0 10
+-262144 -1 -1 1 256;
+#X obj 98 264 print LEFT;
+#X obj 249 182 print RIGHT;
+#X text 51 5 there is a disconnect between the precision that can be
+displayed in Pd and the precision of the math that is happening behind
+the scenes:;
+#X floatatom 187 113 5 0 0 0 - - -;
+#X obj 173 147 moses 1;
+#X connect 0 0 1 0;
+#X connect 1 0 8 0;
+#X connect 1 0 9 0;
+#X connect 9 0 2 0;
+#X connect 9 0 3 0;
+#X connect 9 0 4 0;
+#X connect 9 0 5 0;
+#X connect 9 1 6 0;