mirror of
https://github.com/UpsilonNumworks/Upsilon.git
synced 2026-05-09 08:25:44 +02:00
[GH-ISSUE #127] Automatic significant figures #39
Labels
No labels
bug
duplicate
easy
enhancement
enhancement
fixed
fixed
good first issue
hard
invalid
pull-request
wontfix
wontfix
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
starred/Upsilon#39
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @Lyght28 on GitHub (Jan 15, 2022).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/UpsilonNumworks/Upsilon/issues/127
I think an auto-option for significant figures would be really helpful, notably in the scientific result format.
For exemple, if I try to calculate
2,0x1,577, the result should automatically be3,2.It could be set by putting the significant figures select option at 0 :
@Overengined commented on GitHub (Jan 17, 2022):
This would be a major improvement ! I can't coun't the number of times where I've been fooled by the significant numbers of the calculator, or found the one chosen by the system dumb. This would definitely be a major quality of life improvement, especially for those who study Physics !
@RedGl0w commented on GitHub (Jan 18, 2022):
Another solution could be https://github.com/numworks/epsilon/issues/1847
@Overengined commented on GitHub (Jan 18, 2022):
A tad far from what the OP meant I think. I would be way better for the UX to just have either to put 0 in the limit or tick a box than having to go to additional results to have something exploitable.
@RedGl0w commented on GitHub (Jan 18, 2022):
MB I missunderstood the question. I though it was an auto setting between decimal and scientific form and not significant figures. However, this issue brings some necessary choices (understanding of fraction, ...)
But it shouldn't be that hard
Might be interested doing that if I find the time to do it
@Overengined commented on GitHub (Jan 18, 2022):
The rules in themselves for significant number calculation can be found in any decent high scholl physics manual. So yes, the real challenge will be to make the calculator identify each situation correctly and then applying the rules correctly too.