The challenge required reading an expression from the input and then outputting the result to three decimal places. My friend’s first attempt looked like this:
Terminal window
readvar
echo $(("scale=3; $var"|bc))
However, one test case failed due to being off by 0.001. This tiny discrepancy was a significant clue that the approach to handling decimal precision and rounding needed reevaluation.
Side Note
Although this is a personal style preference, the usual way I would pipe a string into bc would involve echoing the string or using a heredoc, not directly using the $(()) syntax.
A better version might look like this:
Terminal window
readvar
echo"scale=3; $var"|bc
I suggested increasing the scale to 4 (scale=4) to explore the behavior, which led to failing all test cases. It seemed counterintuitive, but the point was to dig deeper into how the bc command processes numbers.
After running some tests locally (always a good practice before submitting your solution), we noticed something interesting:
Terminal window
echo $input
5+50*3/20+ (19*2)/7
echo"scale=4; $input"|bc
17.9285
echo"scale=3; $input"|bc
17.928
echo"$input"|bc
17
echo"$input"|bc-l
17.92857142857142857142
printf"%.3f\n"`echo "$input" |bc-l`
17.929
The exploration revealed a crucial detail: bc truncates rather than rounds numbers when applying the scale. That’s where the printf function becomes handy.
The workaround is to use bc -l for the calculation to ensure full precision and then printf "%.3f\n" to format the output correctly, rounding to three decimal places.
Precision Matters: The failure of a test case by just 0.001 should immediately signal that the handling of decimal precision and rounding is critical.
Test Locally: Always run your code locally first (unless it’s impossible of course!). It helps catch errors and understand the problem better.
Know Your Tools: Understanding how commands like bc and printf work is crucial. bc sets the number of decimal places but doesn’t round, while printf can format and round the output.
Experiment and Learn: Don’t be afraid to change your approach. Testing with a scale of 4 revealed how bc handles precision.
Pay Attention to Details: Small discrepancies can point to larger issues. A mismatch of 0.001 isn’t just a minor error; it’s an indicator that your method of handling precision needs adjustment.
When you face a coding challenge, keep these insights in mind.
Sometimes, the solution involves more than just writing the code; it’s about understanding the behavior of the tools at your disposal.