On Dec 3, 2007 3:29 PM, tedd <tedd.sperling@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > At 2:04 PM -0500 12/3/07, Andrew Ballard wrote: > > > >Oh, man.... I'm having flashbacks to a flame war that broke out on a > >SQL Server board I read related to "bankers rounding" versus > >"traditional rounding" and which was more "correct" or "accurate". > >:-) > > > >Andrew > > There really shouldn't be a debate on which is more accurate, because > that's easily enough to determine. > > One can argue if it makes a difference, or doing it more correctly > takes too much time, or other such considerations, but "how accurate" > is usually determined as the least amount of error produced by a > given calculation method. > > > Cheers, > > tedd > Which is more accurate? Neither - they're both wrong. :-P Uh oh. I may have ignited what I wanted to avoid. Seriously, though, you're probably right. I can't find the thread now, but I seem to recall that the bulk of the discussion centered around someone on the list arguing that the difference between each method was so small that the benefit was negligible, especially compared to the overhead of using a custom function in SQL Server to do what the client asked (to use banker's rounding) versus using the native ROUND function. After all, clients can be so irritating when they expect you to build a system the way they want it. :-) Andrew -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
