hi everyone,

some series of numbers look somewhat odd to me, e.g.

key 2.251.799.813.685.244 in a cell, and

‘that cell’ +0,25 in the cell below, you’ll get 2.251.799.813.685.24 **0**, (sorry for the extra spaces, they were needed for the formatting),

copy the second cell down, the series will be:

**2.251.799.813.685.244**

2.251.799.813.685.24 **0**

2.251.799.813.685.24 **0**

2.251.799.813.685.24 **0**

**2.251.799.813.685.245**

2.251.799.813.685.24 **0**

2.251.799.813.685.2 **50**

2.251.799.813.685.2 **50**

**2.251.799.813.685.246**

2.251.799.813.685.2 **50**

2.251.799.813.685.2 **50**

2.251.799.813.685.2 **50**

**2.251.799.813.685.247**

2.251.799.813.685.2 **50**

2.251.799.813.685.2 **50**

2.251.799.813.685.2 **50**

…

while Weitz IEEE 754 calculator says that:

2251799813685244.0

2251799813685244.3

2251799813685244.5

2251799813685244.8

2251799813685245.0

2251799813685245.3

2251799813685245.5

2251799813685245.8

2251799813685246.0

2251799813685246.3

2251799813685246.5

2251799813685246.8

2251799813685247.0

2251799813685247.3

2251799813685247.5

2251799813685247.8

is correct,

every fourth number x, (in ‘full bold’), is a ‘pure integer’, while the three inbetween are fractions x,25, x,50, x,75 to which obviously some rounding is applied,

but that rounding make no sense to me … whatever it is good for, it breaks math logic!

i suspect that numbers with fractional part are handeled differently to those without?

ex$el in contrast - checked ver. 2010 win7x64 - changes the (display of) the first number to ~40, and produces a less accurate but ‘homogeneous’ series of 21 times ~40, and then continues with ~50,

has anybody any clue what went wrong?

reg.

b.