From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 22 Nov 91 02:29:26 GMT
From: micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.prima
te.wisc.edu!usenet.coe.montana.edu!milton!mfeldman@bloom-beacon.mit.edu  (Micha
el Feldman)
Subject: Re: Red-faced professor gets bitten in search for portability
Message-ID: <1991Nov22.022926.14175@milton.u.washington.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <daves.690605701@condor> daves@assip.csasyd.oz.au writes:
 [ stuff deleted ]
>
>  FUNCTION Trunc (X: Float) RETURN Integer IS
>  BEGIN
>    RETURN Integer(2.0 * X) / 2;
>  END Trunc;
>
>still takes the integer before the division.  In fact, as you've now doubled t
he
>number, the horrible rounding beast is twice as active (i.e. 0.25 and 0.75
>both fall victim).

Indeed. Oops.
>
>I think Mike Murphy's code looks awkward because it's sort of upside down.  Th
e 
>problem can be restated as: "if integer () rounds up, return one less than the
>value of integer (), otherwise return the value of integer ()".
>
>This translates to:
>
>  function trunc (number: float) return integer is
>  begin
>    if float (integer (number)) > number then  -- does it round up?
>      return integer (number) - 1;             -- yes - stop it!
>    else
>      return integer (number);                 -- no - ok as it is.
>    end if;
>  end trunc;
>
>(I'm assuming that my compiler is clever enough to eliminate the redundant con
versions to integer.)
>

Better and simpler. Portable, too, I think.

Mike Feldman