Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.


A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Add Images & Files
    Re: Rounding decimal fractions
    From: Stan K
    Date: 2013 Jul 18, 16:12 -0400

    "Round to even", also known as "banker's rounding", has, IMHO, no place other than a bank.  However, the Nautical Almanac rounding scheme is neither what I called "standard" rounding (as taught by the Power Squadrons) nor banker's rounding.  Banker's rounding makes sense when you are trying to balance the books where there are half cents involved, but I don't see it as being the proper thing to do in anything "scientific".  What I call "standard" rounding has five values that round down and five that round up, i.e. half down and half up.  That seems more sensible to me.

    When I was writing Celestial Tools I was learning Visual Basic 6 from a book called "Visual Basic 6 from the Ground Up".  In it the author writes about "The (New) Round Function", saying "One of the pains of previous versions of Visual Basic was the contortions you had to go through to round off a number.  In VB6 all this pain is eliminated by using the nifty new Round function..."  Nifty my butt.  Half the time I could not get the same answer as I got doing a problem manually.  After doing some research I found that the nifty new Round function used banker's rounding, so I had to go back to doing the contortions (simply making my own function).

    I have seen other programs (Excel perhaps?) that give the user the choice of the kind of rounding to use, which seems to be the way to go.  I guess the .NET Math.Round class also gives the programmer options other than "round to even".

    Celestial Tools is intended to do problems as they would be done by Power Squadrons students, within its accuracy limitations.  My "tweaked" Increments and Corrections rounding routine, with the seven hard-coded corrections that do not fit in, seem to reproduce the "modern" Nautical Almanac Increments and Corrections tables accurately.  I say the "modern" tables because, as we have recently discussed, there are four correction values that changed in 2002.  (To me, that is the most mind-blowing part of this entire discussion.)  I have chosen to leave Celestial Tools that way, with a note about the change in the Help.


    -----Original Message-----
    From: Paul Hirose <cfuhb-acdgw@earthlink.net>
    To: slk1000 <slk1000@aol.com>
    Sent: Thu, Jul 18, 2013 3:33 pm
    Subject: [NavList] Rounding decimal fractions

    Stan K wrote:
     > A couple of years ago a friend of mine and I were discussing how to
    implement Increments and Corrections in my Celestial Tools program and
    his Navigation Calculator Workbook spreadsheet.  Looking at the output
    of his spreadsheet, we noticed that the Almanac values apparently did
    not use what we call "standard" rounding, in this case, for instance,
    0.00 through 0.04 would round down to 0.0 and 0.05 through 0.09 would
    round up to 0.1.
    I thought the convention, when a decimal can be rounded up or down with
    equal accuracy, is "round to even." E.g., 1.05 rounded to the nearest
    tenth is 1.0, but 1.15 is 1.2. But I see that my HP 49G calculator
    rounds up in these borderline cases. With 2 decimal point precision
    selected, 1/8 = .13, 3/8 = .38, 5/8 = .63, 7/8 = .88.
    The composite formatting feature in Microsoft's .NET Framework does the
    same thing as the calculator. But I discovered the .NET Math.Round class
    gives the programmer a "round to even" option. Results from a test program:
    0.125 0.13 0.12
    0.375 0.38 0.38
    0.625 0.63 0.62
    0.875 0.88 0.88
    The first column is the fraction to full accuracy. In the second and
    third columns I used composite formatting with precision of two decimal
    places. The difference is that in the third column the value was first
    rounded with Math.Round.
    The sum of the second column is a little high (1/8 + 3/8 + 5/8 + 7/8 = 2
    exactly) because rounding all borderline cases up introduces a small
    systematic error.
    I have to admit I never pay attention to these fine points in my own
    software. Since Tinyac and Lunar3 both have selectable precision, I
    assume the user will use, say, .01 precision if "tenths" are critical.
    I filter out messages with attachments or HTML.
    View and reply to this message: http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=124634
    Browse Files

    Drop Files


    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your posting code will be emailed to you immediately.

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site