Prevent exponential precision growth in division #325
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Solves github issue ruby#222. Currently repeated division of a number can cause memory use to spike due to the precision of that number growing exponentially. The solution, also employed by various other arbitrary arithmetic libraries, is to only allow the precision to grow with a constant number of digits per operation.
|
#329 fixed the problem without introducing the precision limit, so I'm closing this issue. Thank you for your contribution! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Solves Github issue #222.
Currently repeated division of a number can cause memory use to spike due to the precision of that number growing exponentially. A solution, also employed by various other arbitrary arithmetic libraries, is to only allow the precision to grow with a constant number of digits per operation.
The constant was chosen somewhat arbitrarily by me; I'm not sure what would be good reasons to use e.g. 50 or 200 or ...