469,364 Members | 2,424 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,364 developers. It's quick & easy.

struct, IEEE-754 and internal representation

ej

I ran into something today I don't quite understand and I don't know all the
nitty gritty details about how Python stores and handles data internally.
(I think) I understand why, when you type in certain floating point values,
Python doesn't display exactly what you typed (because not all decimal
numbers are exactly representable in binary, and Python shows you the full
precision of what is representable). For example:
0.9 0.90000000000000002

and
148.73 148.72999999999999

So, I think I've got a pretty good handle on what the struct module is all
about. Let's take that number, 148.73, and use struct functions to look at
the raw bit pattern of what would be in a 32-bit register using IEEE754
float representation:
hex(unpack('L', pack('f', x))[0]) '0x4314BAE1L'

That is, the four bytes representing this are 0x43, 0x14, 0xBA, 0xE1

Now let's go back the other way, starting with this 32 bit representation,
and turn it back into a float:
unpack('>f', pack('BBBB', 0x43, 0x14, 0xBA, 0xE1))[0] 148.72999572753906
Hmmmm... Close, but I seem to be losing more the I would expect here. I
initially thought I should be able to get back to at least what python
previously displayed: 148.72999999999999

I know there are 23 bits of mantissa in an IEEE-754, with a free '1'...
hex(14872999)

'0xe2f1a7'

Looks like it takes 6 * 4 = 24 bits to represent that as an int....

I am starting to think my expectation is wrong...

If that's true, then I guess I am confused why Python is displaying
148.72999572753906 when you unpack the 4 bytes, implying a lot more
precision that was available in the original 32-bits? Python is doing
64-bit floating point here? I'm obviously not understanding something...
help?

-ej


Nov 9 '05 #1
4 2911
On 2005-11-09, ej <> wrote:
If that's true, then I guess I am confused why Python is displaying
148.72999572753906 when you unpack the 4 bytes, implying a lot more
precision that was available in the original 32-bits? Python is doing
64-bit floating point here?


Yes. C-Python "float" objects are of the C type "double" and
use 64-bit IEEE-754 representation on all the common platforms
I know about.

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! .. or were you
at driving the PONTIAC that
visi.com HONKED at me in MIAMI last
Tuesday?
Nov 9 '05 #2
ej wrote:
If that's true, then I guess I am confused why Python is displaying
148.72999572753906 when you unpack the 4 bytes, implying a lot more
precision that was available in the original 32-bits? Python is doing
64-bit floating point here? I'm obviously not understanding something...
help?


Yes, Python uses C double precision floats for float objects.

--
Robert Kern
rk***@ucsd.edu

"In the fields of hell where the grass grows high
Are the graves of dreams allowed to die."
-- Richard Harter

Nov 9 '05 #3
Use 'd' as the format character for 64-bit double precision numbers with struct.
x = 148.73
unpack("<d", pack("<d", x))[0] == x True unpack("<f", pack("<f", x))[0] == x

False

Jeff

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDcohCJd01MZaTXX0RAgEKAJwNYt7Rb/yeaLle4c2XsbIpAoLVXACghpMo
XpcFtakHKmBkf+H4svGrZ5A=
=dw0q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Nov 9 '05 #4
ej
Ah! Well! That explains it. I started to suspect that but (obviously) did
not know that. LOL

Thanks for your prompt reply, Grant. :)

-ej
Nov 10 '05 #5

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

2 posts views Thread by Matt Feinstein | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Ingo Nolden | last post: by
7 posts views Thread by ANaiveProgrammer | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Michael Yanowitz | last post: by
42 posts views Thread by Jeff P. Syverson | last post: by
18 posts views Thread by lovecreatesbea... | last post: by
6 posts views Thread by satheesh | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Anna | last post: by
1 post views Thread by CARIGAR | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.