Difference calculus, examples. - page 22
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
You mean the formula won't, quite, work on a computer?
It will work and for it to work you need to think about how any CPU can process the binary code.
You mean the formula won't, quite, work on a computer?
1+1 won't always be 2
so when you compile (1+1) there's a better chance of 2
if 1.0001 + 1.00000009 then two will be 99% but 1% that it won't)
1+1 will not always be = 2
when compiling (1+1) there is a higher probability of 2
if it's 1.0001 + 1.00000009 then two will be 99% but 1% that it won't)
Yes I encounter costs, about a tenth of a decimal place, (which I think is acceptable) if I use a visual check of the calculations.
True not all programs are comfortable with this. When in work the result does not coincide with expected, received in other program, I look for error in my user algorithm, if I don't find it I have to refuse to use program.
Yes, I do encounter costs beyond about a tenth of a decimal place, (which I think is acceptable) if I use a visual check of the calculations.
It is true that this is not comfortable in all programs. When the result is not coinciding with that expected in another program, I am looking for an error and, if I don't find it, I have to refuse from using the program.
This is not an MQL error. It is an error in microprocessors since x386 and we have to get used to it (the error) and correct it programmatically. Intel has not even fixed this bug in i9.
This is not an MQL error. It is a bug in microprocessors since x386 and you have to get used to it (the bug) and fix it programmatically. Intel did not even fix this bug in i9.
Probably not very good at this. I guess it is a separate field of work, far away from me. )
This is not an MQL error. It is a bug in microprocessors since x386 and you have to get used to it (the bug) and fix it programmatically. Intel did not even fix this error in i9.
And what about AMD processors?
Probably not strong here. I suppose it's a separate line of work, far removed from me. )
There's nothing you can do about it. All procesors since 1992 have this error. It leaves the programmers to take it into account.
And AMD processors?
Intel has all the key certificates, AMD has the same error.
Already recommended this topic before.
I recommend it again.
https://dxdy.ru/post1247421.html#p1247421
I'd like to point out the post number itself in the thread, it's an entertaining one: )))
Is there an implementation?
screenshots for example?
Is there an implementation?
screenshots for example?
An implementation :-? Parts of pure mathematics? Maybe even pure a_rif_metrics.
You've got to be kidding, right? ))