I'll be the first to admit that my overall knowledge of low level programming is a bit sparse. I understand many of the core concepts but I do not use them on a regular basis. That being said I was absolutely astounded at how much code was needed for dtoa.c.
For the past couple months I have been working on an ECMAScript implementation in C# and I've been slowing filling in the holes in my engine. Last night I started working on Number.prototype.toString which is described in section 15.7.4.2 of the ECMAScript specification (pdf). In section 9.8.1, NOTE 3 offers a link to dtoa.c but I was looking for a challenge so I waited to view it. The following is what I came up with.
private IDynamic ToString(Engine engine, Args args)
{
var thisBinding = engine.Context.ThisBinding;
if (!(thisBinding is NumberObject) && !(thisBinding is NumberPrimitive))
{
throw RuntimeError.TypeError("The current 'this' must be a number or a number object.");
}
var num = thisBinding.ToNumberPrimitive();
if (double.IsNaN(num))
{
return new StringPrimitive("NaN");
}
else if (double.IsPositiveInfinity(num))
{
return new StringPrimitive("Infinity");
}
else if (double.IsNegativeInfinity(num))
{
return new StringPrimitive("-Infinity");
}
var radix = !args[0].IsUndefined ? args[0].ToNumberPrimitive().Value : 10D;
if (radix < 2D || radix > 36D)
{
throw RuntimeError.RangeError("The parameter [radix] must be between 2 and 36.");
}
else if (radix == 10D)
{
return num.ToStringPrimitive();
}
var sb = new StringBuilder();
var isNegative = false;
if (num < 0D)
{
isNegative = true;
num = -num;
}
var integralPart = Math.Truncate(num);
var decimalPart = (double)((decimal)num.Value - (decimal)integralPart);
var radixChars = RadixMap.GetArray((int)radix);
if (integralPart == 0D)
{
sb.Append('0');
}
else
{
var integralTemp = integralPart;
while (integralTemp > 0)
{
sb.Append(radixChars[(int)(integralTemp % radix)]);
integralTemp = Math.Truncate(integralTemp / radix);
}
}
var count = sb.Length - 1;
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
var k = count - i;
var swap = sb[i];
sb[i] = sb[k];
sb[k] = swap;
}
if (isNegative)
{
sb.Insert(0, '-');
}
if (decimalPart == 0D)
{
return new StringPrimitive(sb.ToString());
}
var runningValue = 0D;
var decimalIndex = 1D;
var decimalTemp = decimalPart;
sb.Append('.');
while (decimalIndex < 100 && decimalPart - runningValue > 1.0e-50)
{
var result = decimalTemp * radix;
var integralResult = Math.Truncate(result);
runningValue += integralResult / Math.Pow(radix, decimalIndex++);
decimalTemp = result - integralResult;
sb.Append(radixChars[(int)integralResult]);
}
return new StringPrimitive(sb.ToString());
}
Can anyone with more experience in low level programming explain why dtoa.c has roughly 40 times as much code? I just cannot imagine C# being that much more productive.
dtoa.c contains two main functions: dtoa(), which converts a double to string, and strtod(), which converts a string to a double. It also contains a lot of support functions, most of which are for its own implementation of arbitrary-precision arithmetic. dtoa.c's claim to fame is getting these conversions right, and that can only be done, in general, with arbitrary-precision arithmetic. It also has code to round conversions correctly in four different rounding modes.
Your code only tries to implement the equivalent of dtoa(), and since it uses floating-point to do its conversions, will not always get them right. (Update: see my article http://www.exploringbinary.com/quick-and-dirty-floating-point-to-decimal-conversion/ for details.)
(I've written a lot about this on my blog, http://www.exploringbinary.com/ . Six of my last seven articles have been about strtod() conversions alone. Read through them to see how complicated it is to do correctly rounded conversions.)