From: Ben Pfaff Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:10:54 +0000 (-0700) Subject: Use round-toward-0 instead of round-to-nearest in fixed-point example. X-Git-Url: https://pintos-os.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=46e9b5e14e5842c75fb5e236b2563f7d170ab05b;p=pintos-anon Use round-toward-0 instead of round-to-nearest in fixed-point example. Rounding to nearest raises a host of issues that we don't want students to worry about. Suggested by Godmar Back. --- diff --git a/doc/44bsd.texi b/doc/44bsd.texi index f1638f8..743dad3 100644 --- a/doc/44bsd.texi +++ b/doc/44bsd.texi @@ -300,8 +300,8 @@ Suppose that we are using a @m{p.q} fixed-point format, and let @am{f = 2^q, f = 2**q}. By the definition above, we can convert an integer or real number into @m{p.q} format by multiplying with @m{f}. For example, in 17.14 format the fraction 59/60 used in the calculation of -@var{load_avg}, above, is @am{(59/60)2^{14}, 59/60*(2**14)} = 16,111 -(rounded to nearest). To convert a fixed-point value back to an +@var{load_avg}, above, is @am{(59/60)2^{14}, 59/60*(2**14)} = 16,110. +To convert a fixed-point value back to an integer, divide by @m{f}. (The normal @samp{/} operator in C rounds toward zero, that is, it rounds positive numbers down and negative numbers up. To round to nearest, add @m{f / 2} to a positive number, or