I want this to be true for all numbers. I don't want to type this for all numbers of course.
if (overs == 0.6) {
overs = 1.0;
}
I want that if for example 1.6, is reached, it should be converted to 2. I want this to be true for all numbers.
Further Clarification: I don't want it to round at For eg 0.5, i want it to round at 0.6
One Liner
double roundAt6(double n) => (n - n.floor()) > 0.5 ? n.ceil() : n;
Detailed
void main() {
final double overs = 5.6;
print('result: ${roundAt6(overs)}');
}
double roundAt6(double n) {
final double decimalPart = n - n.floor();
print('decimal part: $decimalPart');
final bool didExceed = decimalPart > 0.5;
print('didExceed: $didExceed');
return didExceed ? n.ceil() : n;
}
Maybe ceil()
Returns the least integer no smaller than this.
Example
overs = overs.ceil()
Use round() method.
Returns the integer closest to this.
Example
overs = overs.round()
Insights porvided by #Amsakanna helped me solve the problem. I am posting the exact solution here:
if ((overs - overs.floor()) > 0.55)
{
overs = overs - (overs - overs.floor()) + 1;
}
Related
I am trying to get the output as below:
The problem is from URI-1098 Sequence IJ 4.
My Code is:
void main() {
double x = 0;
double y = 1;
for(double i = x; i<=2; i+= .2){
for(double j=y; j <= y + 2; j++){
if(i==0 || i==1 || i==2){
print('I=${i.toStringAsFixed(0)} J=${j.toStringAsFixed(0)}');
}else{
print('I=${i.toStringAsFixed(1)} J=${j.toStringAsFixed(1)}');
}
}
y += 0.2;
}
}
And my output is:
I=0 J=1
I=0 J=2
I=0 J=3
I=0.2 J=1.2
I=0.2 J=2.2
I=0.2 J=3.2
I=0.4 J=1.4
I=0.4 J=2.4
I=0.4 J=3.4
I=0.6 J=1.6
I=0.6 J=2.6
I=0.6 J=3.6
I=0.8 J=1.8
I=0.8 J=2.8
I=0.8 J=3.8
I=1 J=2
I=1 J=3
I=1 J=4
I=1.2 J=2.2
I=1.2 J=3.2
I=1.2 J=4.2
I=1.4 J=2.4
I=1.4 J=3.4
I=1.4 J=4.4
I=1.6 J=2.6
I=1.6 J=3.6
I=1.6 J=4.6
I=1.8 J=2.8
I=1.8 J=3.8
I=1.8 J=4.8
I=2.0 J=3.0
I=2.0 J=4.0
I=2.0 J=5.0
I am not getting desired outputs for the last 3 lines of the output. Can anyone kindly show the the error in my logic.
Thanking you all in advance.
You're using doubles.
That's the issue here. You are adding 0.2 repeatedly to a value starting at 0, but 0.2 is not precisely representable as a double. The 0.2 literal really represents the double value 0.200000000000000011102230246251565404236316680908203125 which is close to 0.2, but not exactly there.
The values you get by adding 0.2 to itself ten times loses some precision along the way. It hits 1.0 precisely, but then the next addition needs to drop some bits so the next value is actually below 1.2. The final result is 1.9999999999999997779553950749686919152736663818359375 which is not == 2.0, so your check for == 2.0 doesn't trigger. When you ask for the value with one decimal, it does round to "2.0", so you can't tell unless you print the actual value.
There are multiple ways to get around the problem.
One is to not use doubles. If you keep the numbers as integers by multiplying them by ten, then you just need a way to create the string to print. That could be
String toPrint(int value) {
var string = value.toString();
var lead = string.substring(0, string.length - 1);
if (string.endsWith('0')) return lead;
return "$lead.${string.substring(string.length - 1)}";
}
Alternatively, you can keep using doubles, but do .toStringAsFixed(1) and then check whether the last digit is zero. If it is, cut off the last two characters before printing.
I recently started working with Dart, and was trying to format a countdown clock with numbers in a per-second precision.
When counting down time, there's often a precise-yet-imperfect way of representing the time - so if I started a Duration at 2 minutes, and asked to show the current time after one second has elapsed, it is almost guaranteed that the precision of the timer will report at 1:58:999999 (example), and if use Duration.inSeconds() to emit the value, it will be 118 (seconds) which is due to how the ~/ operator works, since it's rounding down to integers based on the Duration's microseconds.
If I render the value as a clock, I'll see the clock go from "2:00" to "1:58" after one second, and will end up displaying "0:00" twice, until the countdown is truly at 0:00:00.
As a human, this appears like the clock is skipping, so I figured since the delta is so small, I should round up to the nearest second, and that would be accurate enough for a countdown timer, and handle the slight imprecision measured in micro/milli-seconds to better serve the viewer.
I came up with this secondRounder approach:
Duration secondRounder(Duration duration) {
int roundedDuration;
if (duration.inMilliseconds > (duration.inSeconds * 1000)) {
roundedDuration = duration.inSeconds + 1;
} else {
roundedDuration = duration.inSeconds;
}
return new Duration(seconds: roundedDuration);
}
This can also be run in this DartPad: https://dartpad.dartlang.org/2a08161c5f889e018938316237c0e810
As I'm yet unfamiliar with all of the methods, I've read through a lot of the docs, and this is the best I've come up with so far. I think I was looking for a method that might looks like:
roundedDuration = duration.ceil(nearest: millisecond)
Is there a better way to go about solving this that I haven't figured out yet?
You can "add" your own method to Duration as an extension method:
extension RoundDurationExtension on Duration {
/// Rounds the time of this duration up to the nearest multiple of [to].
Duration ceil(Duration to) {
int us = this.inMicroseconds;
int toUs = to.inMicroseconds.abs(); // Ignore if [to] is negative.
int mod = us % toUs;
if (mod != 0) {
return Duration(microseconds: us - mod + toUs);
}
return this;
}
}
That should allow you to write myDuration = myDuration.ceil(Duration(seconds: 1)); and round the myDuration up to the nearest second.
The best solution according to the documentation is to use .toStringAsFixed() function
https://api.dart.dev/stable/2.4.0/dart-core/num/toStringAsFixed.html
Examples from the Documentation
1.toStringAsFixed(3); // 1.000
(4321.12345678).toStringAsFixed(3); // 4321.123
(4321.12345678).toStringAsFixed(5); // 4321.12346
123456789012345678901.toStringAsFixed(3); // 123456789012345683968.000
1000000000000000000000.toStringAsFixed(3); // 1e+21
5.25.toStringAsFixed(0); // 5
Another more flexible option can be...
You can use this function to roundup the time.
DateTime alignDateTime(DateTime dt, Duration alignment,
[bool roundUp = false]) {
assert(alignment >= Duration.zero);
if (alignment == Duration.zero) return dt;
final correction = Duration(
days: 0,
hours: alignment.inDays > 0
? dt.hour
: alignment.inHours > 0
? dt.hour % alignment.inHours
: 0,
minutes: alignment.inHours > 0
? dt.minute
: alignment.inMinutes > 0
? dt.minute % alignment.inMinutes
: 0,
seconds: alignment.inMinutes > 0
? dt.second
: alignment.inSeconds > 0
? dt.second % alignment.inSeconds
: 0,
milliseconds: alignment.inSeconds > 0
? dt.millisecond
: alignment.inMilliseconds > 0
? dt.millisecond % alignment.inMilliseconds
: 0,
microseconds: alignment.inMilliseconds > 0 ? dt.microsecond : 0);
if (correction == Duration.zero) return dt;
final corrected = dt.subtract(correction);
final result = roundUp ? corrected.add(alignment) : corrected;
return result;
}
and then use it the following way
void main() {
DateTime dt = DateTime.now();
var newDate = alignDateTime(dt,Duration(minutes:30));
print(dt); // prints 2022-01-07 15:35:56.288
print(newDate); // prints 2022-01-07 15:30:00.000
}
Is there a way with NumberFormat to display :
'15' if double value is 15.00
'15.50' if double value is 15.50
Thanks for your help.
Actually, I think it's easier to go with truncateToDouble() and toStringAsFixed() and not use NumberFormat at all:
n.toStringAsFixed(n.truncateToDouble() == n ? 0 : 2);
So for example:
main() {
double n1 = 15.00;
double n2 = 15.50;
print(format(n1));
print(format(n2));
}
String format(double n) {
return n.toStringAsFixed(n.truncateToDouble() == n ? 0 : 2);
}
Prints to console:
15
15.50
Edit: The solution posted by Martin seens to be a better one
I don't think this can be done directly. You'll most likely need something like this:
final f = new NumberFormat("###.00");
String format(num n) {
final s = f.format(n);
return s.endsWith('00') ? s.substring(0, s.length - 3) : s;
}
Not very easily. Interpreting what you want as printing zero decimal places if it's an integer value and precisely two if it's a float, you could do
var forInts = new NumberFormat();
var forFractions = new NumberFormat();
forFractions.minimumFractionDigits = 2;
forFractions.maximumFractionDigits = 2;
format(num n) =>
n == n.truncate() ? forInts.format(n) : forFractions.format(n);
print(format(15.50));
print(format(15.0));
But there's little advantage in using NumberFormat for this unless you want the result to print differently for different locales.
Maybe you don't want use NumberFormat:
class DoubleToString {
String format(double toFormat) {
return (toFormat * 10) % 10 != 0 ?
'$toFormat' :
'${toFormat.toInt()}';
}
}
A variant of double value formatting:
void main (){
final n1 = 15.00;
final n2 = 15.50;
print(format(n1));
print(format(n2));
}
String format(double n) {
final fraction = n - n.toInt();
if (fraction == 0.0) {
return n.toString();
}
var twoDigitFraction = (fraction * 100).truncateToDouble().toInt();
return '${n.toInt()}.$twoDigitFraction';
}
This will work.
main() {
double n1 = 15.00;
double n2 = 15.50;
print(_formatDecimal(n1));
print(_formatDecimal(n2));
}
_formatDecimal(double value) {
if (value % 1 == 0) return value.toStringAsFixed(0).toString();
return value.toString();
}
Output:
15
15.5
An alternate solution, working on the string output of NumberFormat:
final f = NumberFormat("###.00");
print(f.format(15.01).replaceAll('.00', ''));
print(f.format(15.00).replaceAll('.00', ''));
Here is a flexible function that nicely rounds and removes trailing zeros after the decimal point to resolve double's imperfections. This doesn't handle the strictly 0 or 2 decimal points scenario from the question, but rather is a more general formatting for double numbers that may be useful for others to consider.
The verbose value can be changed to fit precision needs.
void main() {
for (double i = 0; i < 10; i += 0.3) {
print(i);
print(_formatDouble(i));
}
}
//Creates nicely formatted number string without trailing decimal zeros.
String _formatDouble(double value) {
//this also rounds (so 0.8999999999999999 becomes '0.9000')
var verbose = value.toStringAsFixed(4);
var trimmed = verbose;
//trim all trailing 0's after the decimal point (and the decimal point if applicable)
for (var i = verbose.length - 1; i > 0; i--) {
if (trimmed[i] != '0' && trimmed[i] != '.' || !trimmed.contains('.')) {
break;
}
trimmed = trimmed.substring(0, i);
}
return trimmed;
}
prints output:
0
0
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.6
0.8999999999999999
0.9
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.8
1.8
2.1
2.1
2.4
2.4
2.6999999999999997
2.7
2.9999999999999996
3
3.2999999999999994
3.3
3.599999999999999
3.6
3.899999999999999
3.9
4.199999999999999
4.2
4.499999999999999
4.5
4.799999999999999
4.8
5.099999999999999
5.1
5.399999999999999
5.4
5.699999999999998
5.7
5.999999999999998
6
6.299999999999998
6.3
6.599999999999998
6.6
6.899999999999998
6.9
7.1999999999999975
7.2
7.499999999999997
7.5
7.799999999999997
7.8
8.099999999999998
8.1
8.399999999999999
8.4
8.7
8.7
9
9
9.3
9.3
9.600000000000001
9.6
9.900000000000002
9.9
Trying to add a StopLoss to my open market positions which also takes into account my brokers stoplevel. I have set this to add a breakeven stop loss when my trade gets to 100 points in profit.
This is the code - but its completely ignoring any order modification during my back testing.
OK this is now what I have so far, one for loop for the buy, one for the sell. I;ve also declared the "BuyMod" & "SellMod" to true as was suggested in pervious answers, as well as Normalzing prices in the OrderModify signature.
/*Breakeven Order Modification*/
bool BuyMod = true;
bool SellMod = true;
for(int b = OrdersTotal()-1;b>=0;b--)
{
if(OrderSelect(b,SELECT_BY_POS,MODE_TRADES))
{
double aBidPrice = MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_BID);
double anOpenPrice = OrderOpenPrice();
double aNewTpPrice = OrderTakeProfit();
double aCurrentSL = OrderStopLoss();
double aNewSLPrice = anOpenPrice;
double pnlPoints = (aBidPrice - anOpenPrice)/_Point;
double stopPoints = (aBidPrice - aNewSLPrice)/_Point;
int stopLevel = int(MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_STOPLEVEL));
int aTicket = OrderTicket();
if(OrderType() == OP_BUY)
if(stopPoints >= stopLevel)
if(aTicket > 0)
if(pnlPoints >= breakeven)
if(aNewSLPrice != aCurrentSL)
{
BuyMod = OrderModify(OrderTicket(),OrderOpenPrice(),NormalizeDouble(aNewSLPrice,Digits),NormalizeDouble(aNewTpPrice,Digits),0,buycolor);
SendMail("Notification of Order Modification for Ticket#"+IntegerToString(OrderTicket(),10),"Good news! Order Ticket#"+IntegerToString(OrderTicket(),10)+"has been changed to breakeven");
}
}
}
for(int s = OrdersTotal()-1; s>=0; s--)
{
if(OrderSelect(s,SELECT_BY_POS,MODE_TRADES))
{
double anAskPrice = MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_ASK);
double anOpenPrice = OrderOpenPrice();
double aNewTpPrice = OrderTakeProfit();
double aCurrentSL = OrderStopLoss();
double aNewSLPrice = anOpenPrice;
double pnlPoints = (anOpenPrice - anAskPrice)/_Point;
double stopPoints = (aNewSLPrice - anAskPrice)/_Point;
int stopLevel = int(MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_STOPLEVEL));
int aTicket = OrderTicket();
if(OrderType()== OP_SELL)
if(stopPoints >= stopLevel)
if(pnlPoints >= breakeven)
if(aNewSLPrice != aCurrentSL)
if(aTicket > 0)
{
SellMod = OrderModify(OrderTicket(),OrderOpenPrice(),NormalizeDouble(aNewSLPrice,Digits),NormalizeDouble(aNewTpPrice,Digits),0,sellcolor);
SendMail("Notification of Order Modification for Ticket#"+IntegerToString(OrderTicket(),10),"Good news! Order Ticket#"+IntegerToString(OrderTicket(),10)+"has been changed to breakeven");
}
}
}
This code will not work due to several reasons:
First:The function-call signature of OrderModify() is wrong.
You might want to know, that OrderModify() call-signature requires as per MQL4 documentation to include also an OrderExpiration value in the call, even though the Order is currently not a pending order any more.
Check the documentation and the IDE tooltip, which helps one remind the order of the function call parameters.
Second:The other, less-visible reasons could be reported by GetLastError() after the OrderModify() function call returns a False as an indication of failure.
I have an area chart with negative values. Nothing insanely different from the example they give, but there's one twist: I'd like to keep zero centered on the Y axis.
I know this can be achieved by setting the yAxis.max to some value n and yAxis.min to −n, with n representing the absolute value of either the peak of the chart or the trough, whichever is larger (as in this fiddle). However, my data is dynamic, so I don't know ahead of time what n needs to be.
I'm relatively new to Highcharts, so it's possible I'm missing a way to do this through configuration and let Highcharts take care of it for me, but it's looking like I'll need to use Javascript to manually adjust the y axis myself when the page loads, and as new data comes in.
Is there an easy, configuration-driven way to keep zero centered on the Y axis?
I ended up finding a way to do this through configuration after digging even further into the Highcharts API. Each axis has a configuration option called tickPositioner for which you provide a function which returns an array. This array contains the exact values where you want ticks to appear on the axis. Here is my new tickPositioner configuration, which places five ticks on my Y axis, with zero neatly in the middle and the max at both extremes :
yAxis: {
tickPositioner: function () {
var maxDeviation = Math.ceil(Math.max(Math.abs(this.dataMax), Math.abs(this.dataMin)));
var halfMaxDeviation = Math.ceil(maxDeviation / 2);
return [-maxDeviation, -halfMaxDeviation, 0, halfMaxDeviation, maxDeviation];
},
...
}
I know this is an old post, but thought I would post my solution anyway (which is inspired from the one macserv suggested above in the accepted answer) as it may help others who are looking for a similar solution:
tickPositioner: function (min, max) {
var maxDeviation = Math.ceil(Math.max(Math.abs(this.dataMax), Math.abs(this.dataMin)));
return this.getLinearTickPositions(this.tickInterval, -maxDeviation, maxDeviation);
}
You can do this with the getExtremes and setExtremes methods
http://api.highcharts.com/highcharts#Axis.getExtremes%28%29
http://api.highcharts.com/highcharts#Axis.setExtremes%28%29
example:
http://jsfiddle.net/jlbriggs/j3NTM/1/
var ext = chart.yAxis[0].getExtremes();
Here is my solution. The nice thing about this is that you can maintain the tickInterval.
tickPositioner(min, max) {
let { tickPositions, tickInterval } = this;
tickPositions = _.map(tickPositions, (tickPos) => Math.abs(tickPos));
tickPositions = tickPositions.sort((a, b) => (b - a));
const maxTickPosition = _.first(tickPositions);
let minTickPosition = maxTickPosition * -1;
let newTickPositions = [];
while (minTickPosition <= maxTickPosition) {
newTickPositions.push(minTickPosition);
minTickPosition += tickInterval;
}
return newTickPositions;
}
Just in case someone is searching,
One option more. I ended up in a similar situation. Follows my solution:
tickPositioner: function () {
var dataMin,
dataMax = this.dataMax;
var positivePositions = [], negativePositions = [];
if(this.dataMin<0) dataMin = this.dataMin*-1;
if(this.dataMax<0) dataMax = this.dataMax*-1;
for (var i = 0; i <= (dataMin)+10; i+=10) {
negativePositions.push(i*-1)
}
negativePositions.reverse().pop();
for (var i = 0; i <= (dataMax)+10; i+=10) {
positivePositions.push(i)
}
return negativePositions.concat(positivePositions);
},
http://jsfiddle.net/j3NTM/21/
It is an old question but recently I have had the same problem, and here is my solution which might be generalized:
const TICK_PRECISION = 2;
const AXIS_MAX_EXPAND_RATE = 1.2;
function setAxisTicks(axis, tickCount) {
// first you calc the max from the data, then multiply with 1.1 or 1.2
// which can expand the max a little, in order to leave some space from the bottom/top to the max value.
// toPrecision decide the significant number.
let maxDeviation = (Math.max(Math.abs(axis.dataMax), Math.abs(axis.dataMin)) * AXIS_MAX_EXPAND_RATE).toPrecision(TICK_PRECISION);
// in case it is not a whole number
let wholeMaxDeviation = maxDeviation * 10 ** TICK_PRECISION;
// halfCount will be the tick counts on each side of 0
let halfCount = Math.floor(tickCount / 2);
// look for the nearest larger number which can mod the halfCount
while (wholeMaxDeviation % halfCount != 0) {
wholeMaxDeviation++;
}
// calc the unit tick amount, remember to divide by the precision
let unitTick = (wholeMaxDeviation / halfCount) / 10 ** TICK_PRECISION;
// finally get all ticks
let tickPositions = [];
for (let i = -halfCount; i <= halfCount; i++) {
// there are problems with the precision when multiply a float, make sure no anything like 1.6666666667 in your result
let tick = parseFloat((unitTick * i).toFixed(TICK_PRECISION));
tickPositions.push(tick);
}
return tickPositions;
}
So in your chart axis tickPositioner you may add :
tickPositioner: function () {
return setAxisTicks(this, 7);
},