Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Adding bcround, bcfloor and bcceil to BCMath

Hi, Claude, Jorg > If the existence of the function is checked in advance, the BC risk is worst, because they > cannot have known whether the signature and semantics of the function you will introduce will be > compatible with the one they have defined. In case of mismatch the eventual breakage could be more > difficult to notice and trace back. > >Note in particular this SO question: >https://stackoverflow.com/questions/231057/how-to-round-ceil-floor-a-bcmath-number-in-php, >where the second answer has a different rounding mode on halves than the first and third answers. I see now, I may have missed this point. If I implement these functions in BCMath, it seems that you need to think about the problem you mention a little more carefully. > And I understood that the BCMath extension should be abandoned eventually when the GMP library > is properly extended. There is no need for 2 arbitrary precision extensions complementary to each > other but for the rich one having all of the functionalities. > >I don't want to discourage you, because there is clearly a need for such functions. >Speaking from my perspective I would rather invest time into the GMP extension than extend the >BCMath extension. I thought GMP was a function for integers, so I wasn't expecting that tbh. However, even if GMP supported floating point numbers, wouldn't it end up having the inherent error problem of floating point numbers? Regards. Saki