Java

Comments

• RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Makes sense, cause double can represent way bigger numbers than integers.

  source

  • lysdexic@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Also, double can and does in fact represent integers exactly.

    source

    • Killing_Spark@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Only to 2^54. The amount of integers representable by a long is more. But it can and does represent every int value correctly

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Also because if you are dealing with a double, then you’re probably dealing with multiple, or doing math that may produce a double. So returning a double just saves some effort.

    source
  • pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yeah it makes sense to me. You can always cast it if you want an int that bad. Hell just wrap the whole function with your own if it means that much to you

    (Not you, but like a hypothetical person)

    source
  • disencentivized@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Why not just return a long?

    source

    • RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      A double can represent numbers up to ± 1.79769313486231570x10^308, or roughly 18 with 307 zeroes behind it. You can’t fit that into a long, or even 128 bits. Even though rounding huge doubles is pointless, since only the first dozen digits or so are saved, using any kind of Integer would lead to inconsistencies, and thus potentially bugs.

      source
    • Beanie@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      doubles can hold numbers way larger than even 64-bit ints

      source
    • thegamer@burggit.moe ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      A double could also be NaN and any operations with NaN should return NaN afaik

      source
  • karlthemailman@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    How does that work? Is it just because double uses more bits? I’d imagine for the same number of bits, you can store more ints than doubles (assuming you want the ints to be exact values).

    source

    • nile@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      No, it has an exponent component: …wikipedia.org/…/Double-precision_floating-point_…

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• jayrhacker@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It's the same in the the standard c library, so Java is being consistent with a real programming language…

  source

  • idunnololz@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Implying java isn’t a real programming language. Smh my head.

    source

    • Glome@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Java has many abstractions that can be beneficial in certain circumstances. However, it forces a design principle that may not work best in every situation.

      I.e. inheritance can be both unnatural for the programmer to think in, and is not representative of how data is stored and manipulated on a computer.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • jayrhacker@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Java is, of course, Turing Complete™️ but when you have to hide all the guns and knives in jdk.internal.misc.Unsafe something is clearly wrong.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • BlackVenom@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Nice ATM machine.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• korstmos@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Doubles have a much higher max value than ints, so if the method were to convert all doubles to ints they would not work for double values above 2^31-1.

  (It would work, but any value over 2^31-1 passed to such a function would get clamped to 2^31-1)

  source

  • karlthemailman@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    So why not return a long or whatever the 64 bit int equivalent is?

    source

    • whats_a_refoogee@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      To avoid a type conversion that might not be expected. Integer math in Java differs from floating point math.

      Math.floor(10.6) / Math.floor(4.6) = 2.5 (double)

      If floor returned a long, then

      Math.floor(10.6) / Math.floor(4.6) = 2 (long)

      If your entire code section is working with doubles, you might not like finding Math.floor() unexpectedly creating a condition for integer division and messing up your calculation. (Have fun debugging this if you’re not actively aware of this behavior).

      source
    • korstmos@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Because even a long (64-bit int) is too small :)
      A long can hold 2^64-1 = 1.84E19
      A double can hold 1.79E308

      Double does some black magic with an exponent, and can hold absolutely massive numbers!

      Double also has some situations that it defines as "infinity", a concept that does not exist in long as far as I know (?)

      source
  • parlaptie@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    But there’s really no point in flooring a double outside of the range where integers can be represented accurately, is there.

    source
  • affiliate@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    what about using two ints

    source

    • idunnololz@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      What about two int64_t

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • korstmos@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      A BigDecimal?

      source
• MarekKnapek@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Makes sense, how would you represent floor(1e42) or ceil(1e120) as integer? It would not fit into 32bit (unsigned) or 31bit (signed) integer. Not even into 64bit integer.

  source
• maniacal_gaff@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It would be kinda dumb to force everyone to keep casting back to a double, no? If the output were positive, should it have returned an unsigned integer as well?

  source

  • larvyde@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    int coerces to double automatically, without explicit casting

    source

    • snake_baitman@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The CPU has to do real work to convert between float and int types. Returning an int type would just be giving the CPU extra work to do for no reason

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I think one of the main reason to use floor/ceilling is to predictably cast a double into int. This type signature kind of defeats this important purpose.

    I don’t know this historical context of java, but possibly at that time, people see type more of a burden than a way to garentee correctness? (which is kind of still the case for many programmers, unfortunately.

    source

    • BorgDrone@lemmy.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      You wouldn’t need floor/ceil for that. Casting a double to an int is already predictable as the java language spec explicitly says how to do it, so any JVM will do this the exact same way.

      The floor/ceil functions are simply primitive math operations and they are meant to be used when doing floating point math.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• rev@ihax0r.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  python is like this also. I don’t remember a language that returned ints

  source

  • shotgun_crab@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Python 2 returns a float, Python 3 returns an int iirc.

    source
• CaptainHowdy@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  My God this is the most relevant meme I’ve ever seen

  source
• Acetamide@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  AFAIK most typed languages have this behaviour.

  source

  • Lmaydev@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Because ints are way smaller. Over a certain value it would always fail.

    source

    • larvyde@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Yea but at those values floating points can’t represent fractions anyway

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Aelorius@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Logic, in math, if you have a real and you round it, it’s always a real not an integer. If we follow your mind with abs(-1) of an integer it should return a unsigned and that makes no sense.

  source

  • kogasa@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    in math, if you have a real and you round it, it’s always a real not an integer.

    No, that’s made up. Outside of very specific niche contexts the concept of a number having a single well-defined type isn’t relevant in math like it is in programming. The number 1 is almost always considered both an integer and a real number.

    If we follow your mind with abs(-1) of an integer it should return a unsigned and that makes no sense.

    How does that not make sense? abs is always a nonnegative integer value, why couldn’t it be an unsigned int?

    source

    • Aelorius@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I’m ok with that, but what I mean is that it makes no sense to change the type of the provided variable if in mathematics the type can be the same.

      source
  • jimbo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    What? In math, integers can be negative.

    source
• bappity@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  the programming language Java meaning coffee is perfect because, like coffee, it tastes like shit but gets the job done

  source

  • MrGeekman@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I think you need to try some lighter-roasted, higher-quality beans which were roasted fairly recently and only grind them a day or so before you use them. There are also different brewing methods and coffee/water ratios that you can try.

    source

    • mestari@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I love and consume lots of coffee but I sincerely believe it only tastes good because I associate the taste with the boost it gives. Exactly like cigarettes taste tolerable, good even, when you smoke them regularly.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • cia@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It is shit, Austin

    source
• Fantasmita@lib.lgbt ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It’s like Java not having unsigned integers…

  source
• dylanTheDeveloper@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I like big numbers and I cannot tell a lie

  source
• MrGeekman@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Try Math.round. It’s been like ten years since I used Java, but I’m pretty sure it’s in there.

  source
• jayrhacker@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It's the same in the the standard c library, so Java is being consistent with a real programming language…

  source