How to deal with floating point number precision in JavaScript?

JavascriptFloating Point

Javascript Problem Overview


I have the following dummy test script:

function test() {
  var x = 0.1 * 0.2;
  document.write(x);
}
test();

This will print the result 0.020000000000000004 while it should just print 0.02 (if you use your calculator). As far as I understood this is due to errors in the floating point multiplication precision.

Does anyone have a good solution so that in such case I get the correct result 0.02? I know there are functions like toFixed or rounding would be another possibility, but I'd like to really have the whole number printed without any cutting and rounding. Just wanted to know if one of you has some nice, elegant solution.

Of course, otherwise I'll round to some 10 digits or so.

Javascript Solutions


Solution 1 - Javascript

From the Floating-Point Guide:

> What can I do to avoid this problem? > > That depends on what kind of > calculations you’re doing. > > * If you really need your results to add up exactly, especially when you > work with money: use a special decimal > datatype. > * If you just don’t want to see all those extra decimal places: simply > format your result rounded to a fixed > number of decimal places when > displaying it. > * If you have no decimal datatype available, an alternative is to work > with integers, e.g. do money > calculations entirely in cents. But > this is more work and has some > drawbacks.

Note that the first point only applies if you really need specific precise decimal behaviour. Most people don't need that, they're just irritated that their programs don't work correctly with numbers like 1/10 without realizing that they wouldn't even blink at the same error if it occurred with 1/3.

If the first point really applies to you, use BigDecimal for JavaScript, which is not elegant at all, but actually solves the problem rather than providing an imperfect workaround.

Solution 2 - Javascript

I like Pedro Ladaria's solution and use something similar.

function strip(number) {
    return (parseFloat(number).toPrecision(12));
}

Unlike Pedros solution this will round up 0.999...repeating and is accurate to plus/minus one on the least significant digit.

Note: When dealing with 32 or 64 bit floats, you should use toPrecision(7) and toPrecision(15) for best results. See this question for info as to why.

Solution 3 - Javascript

For the mathematically inclined: http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19957-01/806-3568/ncg_goldberg.html

The recommended approach is to use correction factors (multiply by a suitable power of 10 so that the arithmetic happens between integers). For example, in the case of 0.1 * 0.2, the correction factor is 10, and you are performing the calculation:

> var x = 0.1
> var y = 0.2
> var cf = 10
> x * y
0.020000000000000004
> (x * cf) * (y * cf) / (cf * cf)
0.02

A (very quick) solution looks something like:

var _cf = (function() {
  function _shift(x) {
    var parts = x.toString().split('.');
    return (parts.length < 2) ? 1 : Math.pow(10, parts[1].length);
  }
  return function() { 
    return Array.prototype.reduce.call(arguments, function (prev, next) { return prev === undefined || next === undefined ? undefined : Math.max(prev, _shift (next)); }, -Infinity);
  };
})();

Math.a = function () {
  var f = _cf.apply(null, arguments); if(f === undefined) return undefined;
  function cb(x, y, i, o) { return x + f * y; }
  return Array.prototype.reduce.call(arguments, cb, 0) / f;
};

Math.s = function (l,r) { var f = _cf(l,r); return (l * f - r * f) / f; };

Math.m = function () {
  var f = _cf.apply(null, arguments);
  function cb(x, y, i, o) { return (x*f) * (y*f) / (f * f); }
  return Array.prototype.reduce.call(arguments, cb, 1);
};

Math.d = function (l,r) { var f = _cf(l,r); return (l * f) / (r * f); };

In this case:

> Math.m(0.1, 0.2)
0.02

I definitely recommend using a tested library like SinfulJS

Solution 4 - Javascript

Are you only performing multiplication? If so then you can use to your advantage a neat secret about decimal arithmetic. That is that NumberOfDecimals(X) + NumberOfDecimals(Y) = ExpectedNumberOfDecimals. That is to say that if we have 0.123 * 0.12 then we know that there will be 5 decimal places because 0.123 has 3 decimal places and 0.12 has two. Thus if JavaScript gave us a number like 0.014760000002 we can safely round to the 5th decimal place without fear of losing precision.

Solution 5 - Javascript

Surprisingly, this function has not been posted yet although others have similar variations of it. It is from the MDN web docs for Math.round(). It's concise and allows for varying precision.

function precisionRound(number, precision) {
    var factor = Math.pow(10, precision);
    return Math.round(number * factor) / factor;
}

console.log(precisionRound(1234.5678, 1));
// expected output: 1234.6

console.log(precisionRound(1234.5678, -1));
// expected output: 1230

var inp = document.querySelectorAll('input');
var btn = document.querySelector('button');

btn.onclick = function(){
  inp[2].value = precisionRound( parseFloat(inp[0].value) * parseFloat(inp[1].value) , 5 );
};

//MDN function
function precisionRound(number, precision) {
  var factor = Math.pow(10, precision);
  return Math.round(number * factor) / factor;
}

button{
display: block;
}

<input type='text' value='0.1'>
<input type='text' value='0.2'>
<button>Get Product</button>
<input type='text'>

UPDATE: Aug/20/2019

Just noticed this error. I believe it's due to a floating point precision error with Math.round().

precisionRound(1.005, 2) // produces 1, incorrect, should be 1.01

These conditions work correctly:

precisionRound(0.005, 2) // produces 0.01
precisionRound(1.0005, 3) // produces 1.001
precisionRound(1234.5, 0) // produces 1235
precisionRound(1234.5, -1) // produces 1230

Fix:

function precisionRoundMod(number, precision) {
  var factor = Math.pow(10, precision);
  var n = precision < 0 ? number : 0.01 / factor + number;
  return Math.round( n * factor) / factor;
}

This just adds a digit to the right when rounding decimals. MDN has updated the Math.round() page so maybe someone could provide a better solution.

Solution 6 - Javascript

I'm finding BigNumber.js meets my needs.

>> A JavaScript library for arbitrary-precision decimal and non-decimal arithmetic.

It has good documentation and the author is very diligent responding to feedback.

The same author has 2 other similar libraries:

Big.js

>> A small, fast JavaScript library for arbitrary-precision decimal arithmetic. The little sister to bignumber.js.

and Decimal.js

>> An arbitrary-precision Decimal type for JavaScript.

Here's some code using BigNumber:

$(function(){

  
  var product = BigNumber(.1).times(.2);  
  $('#product').text(product);

  var sum = BigNumber(.1).plus(.2);  
  $('#sum').text(sum);


});

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.11.1/jquery.min.js"></script>

<!-- 1.4.1 is not the current version, but works for this example. -->
<script src="http://cdn.bootcss.com/bignumber.js/1.4.1/bignumber.min.js"></script>

.1 &times; .2 = <span id="product"></span><br>
.1 &plus; .2 = <span id="sum"></span><br>

Solution 7 - Javascript

You are looking for an sprintf implementation for JavaScript, so that you can write out floats with small errors in them (since they are stored in binary format) in a format that you expect.

Try javascript-sprintf, you would call it like this:

var yourString = sprintf("%.2f", yourNumber);

to print out your number as a float with two decimal places.

You may also use Number.toFixed() for display purposes, if you'd rather not include more files merely for floating point rounding to a given precision.

Solution 8 - Javascript

var times = function (a, b) {
    return Math.round((a * b) * 100)/100;
};

---or---

var fpFix = function (n) {
    return Math.round(n * 100)/100;
};

fpFix(0.1*0.2); // -> 0.02

---also---

var fpArithmetic = function (op, x, y) {
    var n = {
            '*': x * y,
            '-': x - y,
            '+': x + y,
            '/': x / y
        }[op];        

    return Math.round(n * 100)/100;
};

--- as in ---

fpArithmetic('*', 0.1, 0.2);
// 0.02

fpArithmetic('+', 0.1, 0.2);
// 0.3

fpArithmetic('-', 0.1, 0.2);
// -0.1

fpArithmetic('/', 0.2, 0.1);
// 2

Solution 9 - Javascript

This function will determine the needed precision from the multiplication of two floating point numbers and return a result with the appropriate precision. Elegant though it is not.

function multFloats(a,b){
  var atens = Math.pow(10,String(a).length - String(a).indexOf('.') - 1), 
      btens = Math.pow(10,String(b).length - String(b).indexOf('.') - 1); 
  return (a * atens) * (b * btens) / (atens * btens); 
}

Solution 10 - Javascript

You can use parseFloat() and toFixed() if you want to bypass this issue for a small operation:

a = 0.1;
b = 0.2;

a + b = 0.30000000000000004;

c = parseFloat((a+b).toFixed(2));

c = 0.3;

a = 0.3;
b = 0.2;

a - b = 0.09999999999999998;

c = parseFloat((a-b).toFixed(2));

c = 0.1;

Solution 11 - Javascript

You just have to make up your mind on how many decimal digits you actually want - can't have the cake and eat it too :-)

Numerical errors accumulate with every further operation and if you don't cut it off early it's just going to grow. Numerical libraries which present results that look clean simply cut off the last 2 digits at every step, numerical co-processors also have a "normal" and "full" lenght for the same reason. Cuf-offs are cheap for a processor but very expensive for you in a script (multiplying and dividing and using pov(...)). Good math lib would provide floor(x,n) to do the cut-off for you.

So at the very least you should make global var/constant with pov(10,n) - meaning that you decided on the precision you need :-) Then do:

Math.floor(x*PREC_LIM)/PREC_LIM  // floor - you are cutting off, not rounding

You could also keep doing math and only cut-off at the end - assuming that you are only displaying and not doing if-s with results. If you can do that, then .toFixed(...) might be more efficient.

If you are doing if-s/comparisons and don't want to cut of then you also need a small constant, usually called eps, which is one decimal place higher than max expected error. Say that your cut-off is last two decimals - then your eps has 1 at the 3rd place from the last (3rd least significant) and you can use it to compare whether the result is within eps range of expected (0.02 -eps < 0.1*0.2 < 0.02 +eps).

Solution 12 - Javascript

Notice that for the general purpose use, this behavior is likely to be acceptable.
The problem arises when comparing those floating points values to determine an appropriate action.
With the advent of ES6, a new constant Number.EPSILON is defined to determine the acceptable error margin :
So instead of performing the comparison like this

0.1 + 0.2 === 0.3 // which returns false

you can define a custom compare function, like this :

function epsEqu(x, y) {
    return Math.abs(x - y) < Number.EPSILON;
}
console.log(epsEqu(0.1+0.2, 0.3)); // true

Source : http://2ality.com/2015/04/numbers-math-es6.html#numberepsilon

Solution 13 - Javascript

The round() function at phpjs.org works nicely: http://phpjs.org/functions/round

num = .01 + .06;  // yields 0.0699999999999
rnum = round(num,12); // yields 0.07

Solution 14 - Javascript

decimal.js, big.js or bignumber.js can be used to avoid floating-point manipulation problems in Javascript:

0.1 * 0.2                                // 0.020000000000000004
x = new Decimal(0.1)
y = x.times(0.2)                          // '0.2'
x.times(0.2).equals(0.2)                  // true

> big.js: minimalist; easy-to-use; precision specified in decimal places; precision applied to division only.

> bignumber.js: bases 2-64; configuration options; NaN; Infinity; precision specified in decimal places; precision applied to division only; base prefixes.

>decimal.js: bases 2-64; configuration options; NaN; Infinity; non-integer powers, exp, ln, log; precision specified in significant digits; precision always applied; random numbers.

link to detailed comparisons

Solution 15 - Javascript

The result you've got is correct and fairly consistent across floating point implementations in different languages, processors and operating systems - the only thing that changes is the level of the inaccuracy when the float is actually a double (or higher).

0.1 in binary floating points is like 1/3 in decimal (i.e. 0.3333333333333... forever), there's just no accurate way to handle it.

If you're dealing with floats always expect small rounding errors, so you'll also always have to round the displayed result to something sensible. In return you get very very fast and powerful arithmetic because all the computations are in the native binary of the processor.

Most of the time the solution is not to switch to fixed-point arithmetic, mainly because it's much slower and 99% of the time you just don't need the accuracy. If you're dealing with stuff that does need that level of accuracy (for instance financial transactions) Javascript probably isn't the best tool to use anyway (as you've want to enforce the fixed-point types a static language is probably better).

You're looking for the elegant solution then I'm afraid this is it: floats are quick but have small rounding errors - always round to something sensible when displaying their results.

Solution 16 - Javascript

0.6 * 3 it's awesome!)) For me this works fine:

function dec( num )
{
	var p = 100;
	return Math.round( num * p ) / p;
}

Very very simple))

Solution 17 - Javascript

To avoid this you should work with integer values instead of floating points. So when you want to have 2 positions precision work with the values * 100, for 3 positions use 1000. When displaying you use a formatter to put in the separator.

Many systems omit working with decimals this way. That is the reason why many systems work with cents (as integer) instead of dollars/euro's (as floating point).

Solution 18 - Javascript

not elegant but does the job (removes trailing zeros)

var num = 0.1*0.2;
alert(parseFloat(num.toFixed(10))); // shows 0.02

Solution 19 - Javascript

Problem

Floating point can't store all decimal values exactly. So when using floating point formats there will always be rounding errors on the input values. The errors on the inputs of course results on errors on the output. In case of a discrete function or operator there can be big differences on the output around the point where the function or operator is discrete.

Input and output for floating point values

So, when using floating point variables, you should always be aware of this. And whatever output you want from a calculation with floating points should always be formatted/conditioned before displaying with this in mind.
When only continuous functions and operators are used, rounding to the desired precision often will do (don't truncate). Standard formatting features used to convert floats to string will usually do this for you.
Because the rounding adds an error which can cause the total error to be more then half of the desired precision, the output should be corrected based on expected precision of inputs and desired precision of output. You should

  • Round inputs to the expected precision or make sure no values can be entered with higher precision.
  • Add a small value to the outputs before rounding/formatting them which is smaller than or equal to 1/4 of the desired precision and bigger than the maximum expected error caused by rounding errors on input and during calculation. If that is not possible the combination of the precision of the used data type isn't enough to deliver the desired output precision for your calculation.

These 2 things are usually not done and in most cases the differences caused by not doing them are too small to be important for most users, but I already had a project where output wasn't accepted by the users without those corrections.

Discrete functions or operators (like modula)

When discrete operators or functions are involved, extra corrections might be required to make sure the output is as expected. Rounding and adding small corrections before rounding can't solve the problem.
A special check/correction on intermediate calculation results, immediately after applying the discrete function or operator might be required. For a specific case (modula operator), see my answer on question: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3966484/why-does-modulus-operator-return-fractional-number-in-javascript/45346570#45346570

Better avoid having the problem

It is often more efficient to avoid these problems by using data types (integer or fixed point formats) for calculations like this which can store the expected input without rounding errors. An example of that is that you should never use floating point values for financial calculations.

Solution 20 - Javascript

Elegant, Predictable, and Reusable

Let's deal with the problem in an elegant way reusable way. The following seven lines will let you access the floating point precision you desire on any number simply by appending .decimal to the end of the number, formula, or built in Math function.

// First extend the native Number object to handle precision. This populates
// the functionality to all math operations.

Object.defineProperty(Number.prototype, "decimal", {
  get: function decimal() {
    Number.precision = "precision" in Number ? Number.precision : 3;
    var f = Math.pow(10, Number.precision);
    return Math.round( this * f ) / f;
  }
});


// Now lets see how it works by adjusting our global precision level and 
// checking our results.

console.log("'1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1' Right?");
console.log((0.3333 + 0.3333 + 0.3333).decimal == 1); // true

console.log(0.3333.decimal); // 0.333 - A raw 4 digit decimal, trimmed to 3...

Number.precision = 3;
console.log("Precision: 3");
console.log((0.8 + 0.2).decimal); // 1
console.log((0.08 + 0.02).decimal); // 0.1
console.log((0.008 + 0.002).decimal); // 0.01
console.log((0.0008 + 0.0002).decimal); // 0.001

Number.precision = 2;
console.log("Precision: 2");
console.log((0.8 + 0.2).decimal); // 1
console.log((0.08 + 0.02).decimal); // 0.1
console.log((0.008 + 0.002).decimal); // 0.01
console.log((0.0008 + 0.0002).decimal); // 0

Number.precision = 1;
console.log("Precision: 1");
console.log((0.8 + 0.2).decimal); // 1
console.log((0.08 + 0.02).decimal); // 0.1
console.log((0.008 + 0.002).decimal); // 0
console.log((0.0008 + 0.0002).decimal); // 0

Number.precision = 0;
console.log("Precision: 0");
console.log((0.8 + 0.2).decimal); // 1
console.log((0.08 + 0.02).decimal); // 0
console.log((0.008 + 0.002).decimal); // 0
console.log((0.0008 + 0.0002).decimal); // 0

Cheers!

Solution 21 - Javascript

Solved it by first making both numbers integers, executing the expression and afterwards dividing the result to get the decimal places back:

function evalMathematicalExpression(a, b, op) {
    const smallest = String(a < b ? a : b);
    const factor = smallest.length - smallest.indexOf('.');

    for (let i = 0; i < factor; i++) {
        b *= 10;
        a *= 10;
    }

    a = Math.round(a);
    b = Math.round(b);
    const m = 10 ** factor;
    switch (op) {
        case '+':
            return (a + b) / m;
        case '-':
            return (a - b) / m;
        case '*':
            return (a * b) / (m ** 2);
        case '/':
            return a / b;
    }

    throw `Unknown operator ${op}`;
}

Results for several operations (the excluded numbers are results from eval):

0.1 + 0.002   = 0.102 (0.10200000000000001)
53 + 1000     = 1053 (1053)
0.1 - 0.3     = -0.2 (-0.19999999999999998)
53 - -1000    = 1053 (1053)
0.3 * 0.0003  = 0.00009 (0.00008999999999999999)
100 * 25      = 2500 (2500)
0.9 / 0.03    = 30 (30.000000000000004)
100 / 50      = 2 (2)

Solution 22 - Javascript

Have a look at Fixed-point arithmetic. It will probably solve your problem, if the range of numbers you want to operate on is small (eg, currency). I would round it off to a few decimal values, which is the simplest solution.

Solution 23 - Javascript

You can't represent most decimal fractions exactly with binary floating point types (which is what ECMAScript uses to represent floating point values). So there isn't an elegant solution unless you use arbitrary precision arithmetic types or a decimal based floating point type. For example, the Calculator app that ships with Windows now uses arbitrary precision arithmetic to solve this problem.

Solution 24 - Javascript

Avoid dealing with floating points during the operation using Integers

As stated on the most voted answer until now, you can work with integers, that would mean to multiply all your factors by 10 for each decimal you are working with, and divide the result by the same number used.

For example, if you are working with 2 decimals, you multiply all your factors by 100 before doing the operation, and then divide the result by 100.

Here's an example, Result1 is the usual result, Result2 uses the solution:

var Factor1="1110.7";
var Factor2="2220.2";
var Result1=Number(Factor1)+Number(Factor2);
var Result2=((Number(Factor1)*100)+(Number(Factor2)*100))/100;
var Result3=(Number(parseFloat(Number(Factor1))+parseFloat(Number(Factor2))).toPrecision(2));
document.write("Result1: "+Result1+"<br>Result2: "+Result2+"<br>Result3: "+Result3);

The third result is to show what happens when using parseFloat instead, which created a conflict in our case.

Solution 25 - Javascript

From my point of view, the idea here is to round the fp number in order to have a nice/short default string representation.

> The 53-bit significand precision gives from 15 to 17 significant decimal digits precision (2−53 ≈ 1.11 × 10−16). If a decimal string with at most 15 significant digits is converted to IEEE 754 double-precision representation, and then converted back to a decimal string with the same number of digits, the final result should match the original string. If an IEEE 754 double-precision number is converted to a decimal string with at least 17 significant digits, and then converted back to double-precision representation, the final result must match the original number.
...
With the 52 bits of the fraction (F) significand appearing in the memory format, the total precision is therefore 53 bits (approximately 16 decimal digits, 53 log10(2) ≈ 15.955). The bits are laid out as follows ... wikipedia

(0.1).toPrecision(100) ->
0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

(0.1+0.2).toPrecision(100) ->
0.3000000000000000444089209850062616169452667236328125000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Then, as far as I understand, we can round the value up to 15 digits to keep a nice string representation.

10**Math.floor(53 * Math.log10(2)) // 1e15

eg.

Math.round((0.2+0.1) * 1e15 ) / 1e15
0.3
(Math.round((0.2+0.1) * 1e15 ) / 1e15).toPrecision(100)
0.2999999999999999888977697537484345957636833190917968750000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

The function would be:

function roundNumberToHaveANiceDefaultStringRepresentation(num) {

	const integerDigits = Math.floor(Math.log10(Math.abs(num))+1);
	const mult = 10**(15-integerDigits); // also consider integer digits
	return Math.round(num * mult) / mult;
}

Solution 26 - Javascript

You are right, the reason for that is limited precision of floating point numbers. Store your rational numbers as a division of two integer numbers and in most situations you'll be able to store numbers without any precision loss. When it comes to printing, you may want to display the result as fraction. With representation I proposed, it becomes trivial.

Of course that won't help much with irrational numbers. But you may want to optimize your computations in the way they will cause the least problem (e.g. detecting situations like sqrt(3)^2).

Solution 27 - Javascript

I had a nasty rounding error problem with mod 3. Sometimes when I should get 0 I would get .000...01. That's easy enough to handle, just test for <= .01. But then sometimes I would get 2.99999999999998. OUCH!

BigNumbers solved the problem, but introduced another, somewhat ironic, problem. When trying to load 8.5 into BigNumbers I was informed that it was really 8.4999… and had more than 15 significant digits. This meant BigNumbers could not accept it (I believe I mentioned this problem was somewhat ironic).

Simple solution to ironic problem:

x = Math.round(x*100);
// I only need 2 decimal places, if i needed 3 I would use 1,000, etc.
x = x / 100;
xB = new BigNumber(x);

Solution 28 - Javascript

enter image description here

    You can use library https://github.com/MikeMcl/decimal.js/. 
    it will   help  lot to give proper solution. 
    javascript console output 95 *722228.630 /100 = 686117.1984999999
    decimal library implementation 
    var firstNumber = new Decimal(95);
    var secondNumber = new Decimal(722228.630);
    var thirdNumber = new Decimal(100);
    var partialOutput = firstNumber.times(secondNumber);
    console.log(partialOutput);
    var output = new Decimal(partialOutput).div(thirdNumber);
    alert(output.valueOf());
    console.log(output.valueOf())== 686117.1985

Solution 29 - Javascript

Try my chiliadic arithmetic library, which you can see here. If you want a later version, I can get you one.

Solution 30 - Javascript

Use Number(1.234443).toFixed(2); it will print 1.23

function test(){
    var x = 0.1 * 0.2;
    document.write(Number(x).toFixed(2));
}
test();

Solution 31 - Javascript

I could not find a solution using the built in Number.EPSILON that's meant to help with this kind of problem, so here is my solution:

function round(value, precision) {
  const power = Math.pow(10, precision)
  return Math.round((value*power)+(Number.EPSILON*power)) / power
}

This uses the known smallest difference between 1 and the smallest floating point number greater than one to fix the EPSILON rounding error ending up just one EPSILON below the rounding up threshold.

Maximum precision is 15 for 64bit floating point and 6 for 32bit floating point. Your javascript is likely 64bit.

Solution 32 - Javascript

Use

var x = 0.1*0.2;
 x =Math.round(x*Math.pow(10,2))/Math.pow(10,2);

Solution 33 - Javascript

This works for me:

function round_up( value, precision ) { 
    var pow = Math.pow ( 10, precision ); 
    return ( Math.ceil ( pow * value ) + Math.ceil ( pow * value - Math.ceil ( pow * value ) ) ) / pow; 
}

round_up(341.536, 2); // 341.54

Solution 34 - Javascript

Output using the following function:

var toFixedCurrency = function(num){
    var num = (num).toString();
    var one = new RegExp(/\.\d{1}$/).test(num);
    var two = new RegExp(/\.\d{2,}/).test(num);
    var result = null;

    if(one){ result = num.replace(/\.(\d{1})$/, '.$10');
    } else if(two){ result = num.replace(/\.(\d{2})\d*/, '.$1');
    } else { result = num*100; }

    return result;
}

function test(){
    var x = 0.1 * 0.2;
    document.write(toFixedCurrency(x));
}

test();

Pay attention to the output toFixedCurrency(x).

Solution 35 - Javascript

while adding two float value its never give the precise values so we need to fixed this to certain number that will help us to compare.

>

Solution 36 - Javascript

I am not that much good at programming, but was really interested in this topic so I tried to understand how to solve that without using any libraries or scripts

I wrote this on scratchpad

var toAlgebraic = function(f1, f2) {
    let f1_base = Math.pow(10, f1.split('.')[1].length);
    let f2_base = Math.pow(10, f2.split('.')[1].length);
    f1 = parseInt(f1.replace('.', ''));
    f2 = parseInt(f2.replace('.', ''));

    let dif, base;
    if (f1_base > f2_base) {
        dif = f1_base / f2_base;
        base = f1_base;
        f2 = f2 * dif;
    } else {
        dif = f2_base / f1_base;
        base = f2_base;
        f1 = f1 * dif;
    }

    return (f1 * f2) / base;
};

console.log(0.1 * 0.2);
console.log(toAlgebraic("0.1", "0.2"));

you might need refactor this code, because I am not good at programming :)

Solution 37 - Javascript

My answer could be late, but here is my solution:

function float(equation, precision = 9) {
    return Math.floor(equation * (10 ** precision)) / (10 ** precision);
}

console.log(float(0.1 * 0.2)); // => 0.02
console.log(float(0.2 + 0.4)); // => 0.6
console.log(float(1 / 3));     // => 0.333333333
console.log(float(1 / 3, 2));  // => 0.33

Solution 38 - Javascript

If you don't want to think about having to call functions each time, you can create a Class that handles conversion for you.

class Decimal {
  constructor(value = 0, scale = 4) {
    this.intervalValue = value;
    this.scale = scale;
  }

  get value() {
    return this.intervalValue;
  }

  set value(value) {
    this.intervalValue = Decimal.toDecimal(value, this.scale);
  }

  static toDecimal(val, scale) {
    const factor = 10 ** scale;
    return Math.round(val * factor) / factor;
  }
}

Usage:

const d = new Decimal(0, 4);
d.value = 0.1 + 0.2;              // 0.3
d.value = 0.3 - 0.2;              // 0.1
d.value = 0.1 + 0.2 - 0.3;        // 0
d.value = 5.551115123125783e-17;  // 0
d.value = 1 / 9;                  // 0.1111

Of course, when dealing with Decimal there are caveats:

d.value = 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3;   // 1
d.value -= 1/3;              // 0.6667
d.value -= 1/3;              // 0.3334
d.value -= 1/3;              // 0.0001

You'd ideally want to use a high scale (like 12), and then convert it down when you need to present it or store it somewhere. Personally, I did experiment with creating a UInt8Array and trying to create a precision value (much like the SQL Decimal type), but since Javascript doesn't let you overload operators, it just gets a bit tedious not being able to use basic math operators (+, -, /, *) and using functions instead like add(), substract(), mult(). For my needs, it's not worth it.

But if you do need that level of precision and are willing to endure the use of functions for math, then I recommend the decimal.js library.

Solution 39 - Javascript

I was looking the same fix and I worked out that if you add a whole number in like 1 and evaluate that console.log(0.1 * 0.2 + 1);. Which results in 1.02. This can be used to round the original x variable to the correct amount.

Once the length of the decimal places 2 is retrieved in your example we can then use it with the toFixed() function to round the original x variable correctly.

See inside the code as to what this function does in the commented sections.

var myX= 0.2 * 0.1;
var myX= 42.5-42.65;
var myX= 123+333+3.33+33333.3+333+333;

console.log(myX);
// Outputs (example 1): 0.020000000000000004
// Outputs (example 2): -0.14999999999999858
// Outputs (example 3): 34458.630000000005
// Wrong

function fixRoundingError(x) {
// 1. Rounds to the nearest 10
//    Also adds 1 to round of the value in some other cases, original x variable will be used later on to get the corrected result.
var xRound = eval(x.toFixed(10)) + 1;
// 2. Using regular expression, remove all digits up until the decimal place of the corrected equation is evaluated..
var xDec = xRound.toString().replace(/\d+\.+/gm,'');
// 3. Gets the length of the decimal places.
var xDecLen = xDec.length;
// 4. Uses the original x variable along with the decimal length to fix the rounding issue.
var x = eval(x).toFixed(xDecLen);
// 5. Evaluate the new x variable to remove any unwanted trailing 0's should there be any.
return eval(x);
}

console.log(fixRoundingError(myX));
// Outputs (example 1): 0.02
// Outputs (example 2): -0.15
// Outputs (example 3): 34458.63
// Correct

It returns the same value as the calculator in windows in every case I've tried and also rounds of the result should there be any trailing 0's automatically.

Solution 40 - Javascript

I like the approach with correction factor and here it is my shortened decisions for both ES6 and ES5 standards. Its advantage compared to the toFixed method is that it does not leave unnecessary zeros in the end ot the number, if we want to round to hundreds, but the result number is some tenth number:

ES6 variant:

// .1 + .2
((a,b,crr) => (a*crr + b*crr)/crr)(.1,.2,100/*correction factor*/);//0.3
// .1 * .2
((a,b,crr) => a*crr*b/crr)(.1,.2,100);//0.02

ES5 variant:

// .1 + .2
(function(a,b,crr){ return (a*crr + b*crr)/crr; })(.1,.2,100/*correction factor*/);//0.3
// .1 * .2
(function(a,b,crr){ return a*crr*b/crr; })(.1,.2,100);//0.02

Solution 41 - Javascript

I usually use something like this.

function pf(n) {
    return Math.round(n * 1e15) / 1e15;
}

I make no claim that this is optimal in any way, but I like it for its simplicity. It rounds the number off to 15 decimal places or so. I have not witnessed it returning inaccurate floats, though what is odd is that it has done so when I use * 1e-15 at the end, but not with this method.

This solution may be better suited for casual use -- and not precise mathematical use -- where precision errors are messing up your code.

Solution 42 - Javascript

If you need to make arbitrary-precision floating-point computations, you can use my NPM library called gmp-wasm, which is based on GMP + MPFR libraries. You can easily set any precision you want, and return the result with fixed precision.

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/gmp-wasm"></script>
<script>
  gmp.init().then(({ getContext }) => {
    const ctx = getContext({ precisionBits: 100 });
    const result = ctx.Float('0.1').mul(ctx.Float('0.2'));
    document.write(`0.1 * 0.2 = ` + result.toFixed(2));
    ctx.destroy();
  });
</script>
<!-- end snippet -->

Solution 43 - Javascript

I have a workaround here. Just multiplying with 10E^x doesn't work with 1.1 for example.

function sum(a,b){
	var tabA = (a + "").split(".");
	var tabB = (b + "").split(".");
	decA = tabA.length>1?tabA[1].length:0;
	decB = tabB.length>1?tabB[1].length:0;
	a = (tabA[0]+tabA[1])*1.0;
	b = (tabB[0]+tabB[1])*1.0;
	var diff = decA-decB;
	if(diff >0){
		//a has more decimals than b
		b=b*Math.pow(10,diff);
		return (a+b)/Math.pow(10,decA);
	}else if (diff<0){
		//a has more decimals than b
		a=a*Math.pow(10,-diff);
                return (a+b)/Math.pow(10,decB);
	}else{
		return (a+b)/Math.pow(10,decA);
	}		
}

scary but working :)

Solution 44 - Javascript

Threw this together based on @SheetJs's answer, which I liked:

  getCorrectionFactor(numberToCheck: number): number {
    var correctionFactor: number = 1;
    
    if (!Number.isInteger(numberToCheck)) {
      while (!Number.isInteger(numberToCheck)) {
        correctionFactor *= 10;
        numberToCheck *= correctionFactor;
      }
    }

    return correctionFactor;
  }

Solution 45 - Javascript

To handle arbitrary floating number:

function shorten(num) {
    num += 0.000000001;// to deal with "12.03999999997" form
    num += '';
    return num.replace(/(\.\d*?)0{5,}\d+$/, '$1') * 1;
}

console.log(1.2+1.9===1.3+1.8);// false
console.log(shorten(1.2+1.9)===shorten(1.3+1.8));// true

Solution 46 - Javascript

You could use a regex to check if the number ends with a long string of 0s followed by a small remainder:

// using max number of 0s = 8, maximum remainder = 4 digits
x = 0.1048000000000051
parseFloat(x.toString().replace(/(\.[\d]+[1-9])0{8,}[1-9]{0,4}/, '$1'), 10)
// = 0.1048

Attributions

All content for this solution is sourced from the original question on Stackoverflow.

The content on this page is licensed under the Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license.

Content TypeOriginal AuthorOriginal Content on Stackoverflow
QuestionJuriView Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - JavascriptMichael BorgwardtView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - Javascriptlinux_mikeView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 3 - JavascriptSheetJSView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 4 - JavascriptNate ZauggView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 5 - JavascriptHelloWorldPeaceView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 6 - JavascriptRonnie OverbyView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 7 - JavascriptDouglasView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 8 - JavascriptshawndumasView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 9 - JavascriptGabrielView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 10 - JavascriptSoftwareddyView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 11 - JavascriptZXXView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 12 - Javascriptuser10089632View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 13 - JavascriptTomView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 14 - JavascriptErikas PliaukstaView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 15 - JavascriptKeithView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 16 - JavascriptОлег ВсильдеревьевView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 17 - JavascriptGertjanView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 18 - JavascriptPeterView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 19 - JavascriptStefan MondelaersView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 20 - JavascriptBernestoView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 21 - JavascriptSimonView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 22 - JavascriptMariusView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 23 - JavascriptMSNView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 24 - JavascriptDavidTaubmannView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 25 - JavascriptFranck FreiburgerView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 26 - JavascriptskaleeView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 27 - Javascriptmcgeo52View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 28 - JavascriptAshish SinghalView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 29 - JavascriptRobert LView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 30 - JavascriptHarish.bazeeView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 31 - JavascriptKarlssonView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 32 - JavascriptHimadriView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 33 - JavascriptAntonio MaxView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 34 - JavascriptJúlio PaulilloView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 35 - Javascriptblack_pottery_beautyView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 36 - JavascriptJeevaView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 37 - JavascriptMr_NAIFView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 38 - JavascriptShortFuseView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 39 - JavascriptSteView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 40 - JavascriptChristiyanView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 41 - JavascriptNovarenderView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 42 - JavascriptBiró DaniView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 43 - JavascriptTecHunterView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 44 - JavascriptJohnView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 45 - JavascriptblackmiaoolView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 46 - Javascriptuser2008398View Answer on Stackoverflow