• State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 16 replies
  • Subscribers 22 subscribers
  • Views 4530 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
How was your experience today?
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Inacurate precision truncating.

Zhi Chen

Hi folk,
I have

u16 wTemp = 0;
fsingle fTemp = 17.5123;

wTemp = (u16)fTemp;
Somehow, the wTemp is 17. Technically, the wTemp should be 18, do anybody know what do I have to do for the compiler in order to generate more precise data conversion???

Thanks!

Parents
  • 0 in reply to Dan Henry

    True that folks, there is no need to talk about programming styles.
    In general, our team follow some sort of programming style pattern. This is due to programming skill differences among team members. So in general, making the program source code as explicitly as possible so that there is no misunderstanding and in addition, the C compiler will be smart enought to optimize "all" redundency.

Reply
  • 0 in reply to Dan Henry

    True that folks, there is no need to talk about programming styles.
    In general, our team follow some sort of programming style pattern. This is due to programming skill differences among team members. So in general, making the program source code as explicitly as possible so that there is no misunderstanding and in addition, the C compiler will be smart enought to optimize "all" redundency.

Children
  • 0 in reply to Zhi Chen

    "the C compiler will be smart enought to optimize "all" redundency."

    You'd hope so, wouldn't you?

    I did once come across a compiler (not 8051; not Keil; someone beginning with 'I') which did produce different results if you used "unnecessary" parentheses!

    But then their assembler produced the same opcode for both the "Jump If Equal" and "Jump If Not Equal" mnemonics!!