Is it possible to set precision of double values in c# for all double values included in the project? I have a lot of values there and changing them with Math.Round would be exhausting. I need to have the double value as 5.12345 instead of 5.123455123321321 for example.
This is a fundamental limitation of floating point types.. double is actually store internally as a sign exponent and mantissa, the exponent is base 2, so has a lot of trouble dealing with base 10..
The easiest solution is to use a base 10 64bit floating point type, namely decimal. Its still floating point, it still only limited precision but it is a lot friendly and more accurate to work with in a lot of cases
Update
If all you want to do is change the display output, you can either use rounding (which you know), or the appropriate format specifiers with string.format ToString or string interpolation
Example
var number = 5.123455123321321;
Console.WriteLine(number.ToString("F3",
CultureInfo.InvariantCulture));
Console.WriteLine($"{number:F3}");
// Displays 5.123
// Displays 5.123
Related
I'm attempting to truncate a series of double-precision values in C#. The following value fails no matter what rounding method I use. What is wrong with this value that causes both of these methods to fail? Why does even Math.Round fail to correctly truncate the number? What method can be used instead to correctly truncate such values?
The value :
double value = 0.61740451388888251;
Method 1:
return Math.Round(value, digits);
Method 2:
double multiplier = Math.Pow(10, decimals)
return Math.Round(value * multiplier) / multiplier;
Fails even in VS watch window!
Double is a floating binary point type. They are represented in binary system (like 11010.00110). When double is presented in decimal system it is only an approximation as not all binary numbers have exact representation in decimal system. Try for example this operation:
double d = 3.65d + 0.05d;
It will not result in 3.7 but in 3.6999999999999997. It is because the variable contains a closest available double.
The same happens in your case. Your variable contains closest available double.
For precise operations double/float is not the most fortunate choice.
Use double/float when you need fast performance or you want to operate on larger range of numbers, but where high precision is not required. For instance, it is perfect type for calculations in physics.
For precise decimal operations use, well, decimal.
Here is an article about float/decimal: http://csharpindepth.com/Articles/General/FloatingPoint.aspx
If you need a more exact representation of the number you might have to use the decimal type, which has more precision but smaller range (it's usually used financial calculations).
More info on when to use each here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/618596/1373170
According to this online tool which gives the binary representation of doubles, the two closest double values to 0.62 are:
6.19999999999999995559107901499E-1 or 0x3FE3D70A3D70A3D7
link
6.20000000000000106581410364015E-1 or 0x3FE3D70A3D70A3D8
link
I'm not sure why neither of these agree with your value exactly, but like the others said, it is likely a floating point representation issue.
I think you are running up against the binary limit of a double-precision float (64 bits). From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-precision_floating-point_format, a double only gives between 15-17 significant digits.
Let's say we have the following simple code
string number = "93389.429999999993";
double numberAsDouble = Convert.ToDouble(number);
Console.WriteLine(numberAsDouble);
after that conversion numberAsDouble variable has the value 93389.43. What can i do to make this variable keep the full number as is without rounding it? I have found that Convert.ToDecimal does not behave the same way but i need to have the value as double.
-------------------small update---------------------
putting a breakpoint in line 2 of the above code shows that the numberAsDouble variable has the rounded value 93389.43 before displayed in the console.
93389.429999999993 cannot be represented exactly as a 64-bit floating point number. A double can only hold 15 or 16 digits, while you have 17 digits. If you need that level of precision use a decimal instead.
(I know you say you need it as a double, but if you could explain why, there may be alternate solutions)
This is expected behavior.
A double can't represent every number exactly. This has nothing to do with the string conversion.
You can check it yourself:
Console.WriteLine(93389.429999999993);
This will print 93389.43.
The following also shows this:
Console.WriteLine(93389.429999999993 == 93389.43);
This prints True.
Keep in mind that there are two conversions going on here. First you're converting the string to a double, and then you're converting that double back into a string to display it.
You also need to consider that a double doesn't have infinite precision; depending on the string, some data may be lost due to the fact that a double doesn't have the capacity to store it.
When converting to a double it's not going to "round" any more than it has to. It will create the double that is closest to the number provided, given the capabilities of a double. When converting that double to a string it's much more likely that some information isn't kept.
See the following (in particular the first part of Michael Borgwardt's answer):
decimal vs double! - Which one should I use and when?
A double will not always keep the precision depending on the number you are trying to convert
If you need to be precise you will need to use decimal
This is a limit on the precision that a double can store. You can see this yourself by trying to convert 3389.429999999993 instead.
The double type has a finite precision of 64 bits, so a rounding error occurs when the real number is stored in the numberAsDouble variable.
A solution that would work for your example is to use the decimal type instead, which has 128 bit precision. However, the same problem arises with a smaller difference.
For arbitrary large numbers, the System.Numerics.BigInteger object from the .NET Framework 4.0 supports arbitrary precision for integers. However you will need a 3rd party library to use arbitrary large real numbers.
You could truncate the decimal places to the amount of digits you need, not exceeding double precision.
For instance, this will truncate to 5 decimal places, getting 93389.42999. Just replace 100000 for the needed value
string number = "93389.429999999993";
decimal numberAsDecimal = Convert.ToDecimal(number);
var numberAsDouble = ((double)((long)(numberAsDecimal * 100000.0m))) / 100000.0;
In the example below the number 12345678.9 loses accuracy when it's converted to a string as it becomes 1.234568E+07. I just need a way to preserve the accuracy for large floating point numbers. Thanks.
Single sin1 = 12345678.9F;
String str1 = sin1.ToString();
Console.WriteLine(str1); // displays 1.234568E+07
If you want to preserve decimal numbers, you should use System.Decimal. It's as simple as that. System.Single is worse than System.Double in that as per the documentation:
By default, a Single value contains only 7 decimal digits of precision, although a maximum of 9 digits is maintained internally.
You haven't just lost information when you've converted it to a string - you've lost information in the very first line. That's not just because you're using float instead of double - it's because you're using a floating binary point number.
The decimal number 0.1 can't be represented accurately in a binary floating point system no matter how big you make the type...
See my articles on floating binary point and floating decimal point for more information. Of course, it's possible that you should be using double or even float and just not caring about the loss of precision - it depends on what you're trying to represent. But if you really do care about preserving decimal digits, then use a decimal-based type.
You can't. Simple as that. In memory your number is 12345679. Try the code below.
Single sin1 = 12345678.9F;
String str1 = sin1.ToString("r"); // Shows "all" the number
Console.WriteLine(sin1 == 12345679); // true
Console.WriteLine(str1); // displays 12345679
Technically r means (quoting from MSDN) round-trip: Result: A string that can round-trip to an identical number. so in reality it isn't showing all the decimals. It's only showing all the decimals needed to distinguish it from other possible values of Single. If you want to show all the decimals use F20.
If you want more precision use double or better use decimal. float has the precision that it has. As we say in Italy "Non puoi spremere sangue da una rapa" (You can't squeeze blood from a turnip)
You could also write an IFormatProvider for your purpose - but the precision doesn't get any better unless you use a different type.
this article may help - http://www.csharp-examples.net/string-format-double/
I understand the principle behind this problem but it's giving me a headache to think that this is going on throughout my application and I need to find as solution.
double Value = 141.1;
double Discount = 25.0;
double disc = Value * Discount / 100; // disc = 35.275
Value -= disc; // Value = 105.824999999999999
Value = Functions.Round(Value, 2); // Value = 105.82
I'm using doubles to represent quite small numbers. Somehow in the calculation 141.1 - 35.275 the binary representation of the result gives a number which is just 0.0000000000001 out. Unfortunately, since I am then rounding this number, this gives the wrong answer.
I've read about using Decimals instead of Doubles but I can't replace every instance of a Double with a Decimal. Is there some easier way to get around this?
If you're looking for exact representations of values which are naturally decimal, you will need to replace double with decimal everywhere. You're simply using the wrong datatype. If you'd been using short everywhere for integers and then found out that you needed to cope with larger values than that supports, what would you do? It's the same deal.
However, you should really try to understand what's going on to start with... why Value doesn't equal exactly 141.1, for example.
I have two articles on this:
Binary floating point in .NET
Decimal floating point in .NET
You should use decimal – that's what it's for.
The behaviour of floating point arithmetic? That's just what it does. It has limited finite precision. Not all numbers are exactly representable. In fact, there are an infinite number of real valued numbers, and only a finite number can be representable. The key to decimal, for this application, is that it uses a base 10 representation – double uses base 2.
Instead of using Round to round the number, you could use some function you write yourself which uses a small epsilon when rounding to allow for the error. That's the answer you want.
The answer you don't want, but I'm going to give anyway, is that if you want precision, and since you're dealing with money judging by your example you probably do, you should not be using binary floating point maths. Binary floating point is inherently inaccurate and some numbers just can't be represented correctly. Using Decimal, which does base-10 floating point, would be a much better approach everywhere and will avoid you making costly mistakes with your doubles.
After spending most of the morning trying to replace every instance of a 'double' to 'decimal' and realising I was fighting a losing battle, I had another look at my Round function. This may be useful to those who can't implement the proper solution:
public static double Round(double dbl, int decimals) {
return (double)Math.Round((decimal)dbl, decimals, MidpointRounding.AwayFromZero);
}
By first casting the value to a decimal, and then calling Math.Round, this will return the 'correct' value.
I made a query to SQL Server to get some data via a Stored Procedure, the returned value was this:
10219150
Then, in an assembly (I don't have the source code of that assembly, I reflected the file to view the code) someone had written this:
Amount = Convert.ToSingle(10219150); //the value from the stored procedure
So, when I invoke that method which does the final conversion, it returns this value:
1.021315E+7
How is that possible? Why does the Convert.ToSingle add extra decimal positions? I don't understand.
Is there a way that i can reverse that conversion on my code when I invoke that method of the assembly? I can't rewrite that assembly file as it's too big, and, as I mentioned earlier, I don't have the source code to fix the conversion.
From this: 1.021315E+7 To this: 10219150 again (restore the correct value without that conversion)
Hope I made myself clear.
Thanks in advance.
The conversion to single isn't adding extra precision.
10219150 is 1.021315E+7 (which is just another way of writing 1.021315 * 107).
The method you are using to print out the value is just using scientific notation to display the number.
If you are printing the number then you need to set the formatting options.
float amount = Convert.ToSingle("10219150");
string toPrint = string.Format("{0:N}", amount);
Will print the number as:
"10,219,150.00"
To get no decimal places use "{0:N0}" as the format string.
You have two issues. One is easily solved, and the other may be more difficult or impossible.
As ChrisF stated, 1.021315E+7 is simply another way of writing 10219150. (The E+7 part in Scientific Notation means to shift the decimal point 7 places to the right.) When you format your single precision value, you can use
fvalue.ToString("f0");
to display as an integer, rather than in Scientific Notation.
The bigger problem, unfortunately, is that a single precision float can only hold 7 significant digits, and in your example you are storing 8. Therefore, the last digit may be rounded. (Since it happens to be 0 in your case, the rounding might not have been noticed.)
If that loss of precision is critical, you would likely need to fetch the value from the database as a long, or as a double-precision value (depending on the type of data returned.) Each of these types can hold more significant digits.
When the value is converted to Single, it's rounded as it contains more significant digits that can fit in a Single. If you convert 10213153 to Single you also end up with 1.021315E+7 i.e. 10213150.
As the code uses a Single to store the amount, there is nothing that you can do to make it handle the current value correctly. The amount simply can not be represented correctly as a Single.
You either have to use lower values, or change the code.