Related
I want to remove digits from a float to have a fixed number of digits after the dot, like:
1.923328437452 → 1.923
I need to output as a string to another function, not print.
Also I want to ignore the lost digits, not round them.
round(1.923328437452, 3)
See Python's documentation on the standard types. You'll need to scroll down a bit to get to the round function. Essentially the second number says how many decimal places to round it to.
First, the function, for those who just want some copy-and-paste code:
def truncate(f, n):
'''Truncates/pads a float f to n decimal places without rounding'''
s = '{}'.format(f)
if 'e' in s or 'E' in s:
return '{0:.{1}f}'.format(f, n)
i, p, d = s.partition('.')
return '.'.join([i, (d+'0'*n)[:n]])
This is valid in Python 2.7 and 3.1+. For older versions, it's not possible to get the same "intelligent rounding" effect (at least, not without a lot of complicated code), but rounding to 12 decimal places before truncation will work much of the time:
def truncate(f, n):
'''Truncates/pads a float f to n decimal places without rounding'''
s = '%.12f' % f
i, p, d = s.partition('.')
return '.'.join([i, (d+'0'*n)[:n]])
Explanation
The core of the underlying method is to convert the value to a string at full precision and then just chop off everything beyond the desired number of characters. The latter step is easy; it can be done either with string manipulation
i, p, d = s.partition('.')
'.'.join([i, (d+'0'*n)[:n]])
or the decimal module
str(Decimal(s).quantize(Decimal((0, (1,), -n)), rounding=ROUND_DOWN))
The first step, converting to a string, is quite difficult because there are some pairs of floating point literals (i.e. what you write in the source code) which both produce the same binary representation and yet should be truncated differently. For example, consider 0.3 and 0.29999999999999998. If you write 0.3 in a Python program, the compiler encodes it using the IEEE floating-point format into the sequence of bits (assuming a 64-bit float)
0011111111010011001100110011001100110011001100110011001100110011
This is the closest value to 0.3 that can accurately be represented as an IEEE float. But if you write 0.29999999999999998 in a Python program, the compiler translates it into exactly the same value. In one case, you meant it to be truncated (to one digit) as 0.3, whereas in the other case you meant it to be truncated as 0.2, but Python can only give one answer. This is a fundamental limitation of Python, or indeed any programming language without lazy evaluation. The truncation function only has access to the binary value stored in the computer's memory, not the string you actually typed into the source code.1
If you decode the sequence of bits back into a decimal number, again using the IEEE 64-bit floating-point format, you get
0.2999999999999999888977697537484345957637...
so a naive implementation would come up with 0.2 even though that's probably not what you want. For more on floating-point representation error, see the Python tutorial.
It's very rare to be working with a floating-point value that is so close to a round number and yet is intentionally not equal to that round number. So when truncating, it probably makes sense to choose the "nicest" decimal representation out of all that could correspond to the value in memory. Python 2.7 and up (but not 3.0) includes a sophisticated algorithm to do just that, which we can access through the default string formatting operation.
'{}'.format(f)
The only caveat is that this acts like a g format specification, in the sense that it uses exponential notation (1.23e+4) if the number is large or small enough. So the method has to catch this case and handle it differently. There are a few cases where using an f format specification instead causes a problem, such as trying to truncate 3e-10 to 28 digits of precision (it produces 0.0000000002999999999999999980), and I'm not yet sure how best to handle those.
If you actually are working with floats that are very close to round numbers but intentionally not equal to them (like 0.29999999999999998 or 99.959999999999994), this will produce some false positives, i.e. it'll round numbers that you didn't want rounded. In that case the solution is to specify a fixed precision.
'{0:.{1}f}'.format(f, sys.float_info.dig + n + 2)
The number of digits of precision to use here doesn't really matter, it only needs to be large enough to ensure that any rounding performed in the string conversion doesn't "bump up" the value to its nice decimal representation. I think sys.float_info.dig + n + 2 may be enough in all cases, but if not that 2 might have to be increased, and it doesn't hurt to do so.
In earlier versions of Python (up to 2.6, or 3.0), the floating point number formatting was a lot more crude, and would regularly produce things like
>>> 1.1
1.1000000000000001
If this is your situation, if you do want to use "nice" decimal representations for truncation, all you can do (as far as I know) is pick some number of digits, less than the full precision representable by a float, and round the number to that many digits before truncating it. A typical choice is 12,
'%.12f' % f
but you can adjust this to suit the numbers you're using.
1Well... I lied. Technically, you can instruct Python to re-parse its own source code and extract the part corresponding to the first argument you pass to the truncation function. If that argument is a floating-point literal, you can just cut it off a certain number of places after the decimal point and return that. However this strategy doesn't work if the argument is a variable, which makes it fairly useless. The following is presented for entertainment value only:
def trunc_introspect(f, n):
'''Truncates/pads the float f to n decimal places by looking at the caller's source code'''
current_frame = None
caller_frame = None
s = inspect.stack()
try:
current_frame = s[0]
caller_frame = s[1]
gen = tokenize.tokenize(io.BytesIO(caller_frame[4][caller_frame[5]].encode('utf-8')).readline)
for token_type, token_string, _, _, _ in gen:
if token_type == tokenize.NAME and token_string == current_frame[3]:
next(gen) # left parenthesis
token_type, token_string, _, _, _ = next(gen) # float literal
if token_type == tokenize.NUMBER:
try:
cut_point = token_string.index('.') + n + 1
except ValueError: # no decimal in string
return token_string + '.' + '0' * n
else:
if len(token_string) < cut_point:
token_string += '0' * (cut_point - len(token_string))
return token_string[:cut_point]
else:
raise ValueError('Unable to find floating-point literal (this probably means you called {} with a variable)'.format(current_frame[3]))
break
finally:
del s, current_frame, caller_frame
Generalizing this to handle the case where you pass in a variable seems like a lost cause, since you'd have to trace backwards through the program's execution until you find the floating-point literal which gave the variable its value. If there even is one. Most variables will be initialized from user input or mathematical expressions, in which case the binary representation is all there is.
The result of round is a float, so watch out (example is from Python 2.6):
>>> round(1.923328437452, 3)
1.923
>>> round(1.23456, 3)
1.2350000000000001
You will be better off when using a formatted string:
>>> "%.3f" % 1.923328437452
'1.923'
>>> "%.3f" % 1.23456
'1.235'
n = 1.923328437452
str(n)[:4]
At my Python 2.7 prompt:
>>> int(1.923328437452 * 1000)/1000.0
1.923
The truely pythonic way of doing it is
from decimal import *
with localcontext() as ctx:
ctx.rounding = ROUND_DOWN
print Decimal('1.923328437452').quantize(Decimal('0.001'))
or shorter:
from decimal import Decimal as D, ROUND_DOWN
D('1.923328437452').quantize(D('0.001'), rounding=ROUND_DOWN)
Update
Usually the problem is not in truncating floats itself, but in the improper usage of float numbers before rounding.
For example: int(0.7*3*100)/100 == 2.09.
If you are forced to use floats (say, you're accelerating your code with numba), it's better to use cents as "internal representation" of prices: (70*3 == 210) and multiply/divide the inputs/outputs.
Simple python script -
n = 1.923328437452
n = float(int(n * 1000))
n /=1000
def trunc(num, digits):
sp = str(num).split('.')
return '.'.join([sp[0], sp[1][:digits]])
This should work. It should give you the truncation you are looking for.
So many of the answers given for this question are just completely wrong. They either round up floats (rather than truncate) or do not work for all cases.
This is the top Google result when I search for 'Python truncate float', a concept which is really straightforward, and which deserves better answers. I agree with Hatchkins that using the decimal module is the pythonic way of doing this, so I give here a function which I think answers the question correctly, and which works as expected for all cases.
As a side-note, fractional values, in general, cannot be represented exactly by binary floating point variables (see here for a discussion of this), which is why my function returns a string.
from decimal import Decimal, localcontext, ROUND_DOWN
def truncate(number, places):
if not isinstance(places, int):
raise ValueError("Decimal places must be an integer.")
if places < 1:
raise ValueError("Decimal places must be at least 1.")
# If you want to truncate to 0 decimal places, just do int(number).
with localcontext() as context:
context.rounding = ROUND_DOWN
exponent = Decimal(str(10 ** - places))
return Decimal(str(number)).quantize(exponent).to_eng_string()
>>> from math import floor
>>> floor((1.23658945) * 10**4) / 10**4
1.2365
# divide and multiply by 10**number of desired digits
If you fancy some mathemagic, this works for +ve numbers:
>>> v = 1.923328437452
>>> v - v % 1e-3
1.923
I did something like this:
from math import trunc
def truncate(number, decimals=0):
if decimals < 0:
raise ValueError('truncate received an invalid value of decimals ({})'.format(decimals))
elif decimals == 0:
return trunc(number)
else:
factor = float(10**decimals)
return trunc(number*factor)/factor
You can do:
def truncate(f, n):
return math.floor(f * 10 ** n) / 10 ** n
testing:
>>> f=1.923328437452
>>> [truncate(f, n) for n in range(5)]
[1.0, 1.9, 1.92, 1.923, 1.9233]
Just wanted to mention that the old "make round() with floor()" trick of
round(f) = floor(f+0.5)
can be turned around to make floor() from round()
floor(f) = round(f-0.5)
Although both these rules break around negative numbers, so using it is less than ideal:
def trunc(f, n):
if f > 0:
return "%.*f" % (n, (f - 0.5*10**-n))
elif f == 0:
return "%.*f" % (n, f)
elif f < 0:
return "%.*f" % (n, (f + 0.5*10**-n))
def precision(value, precision):
"""
param: value: takes a float
param: precision: int, number of decimal places
returns a float
"""
x = 10.0**precision
num = int(value * x)/ x
return num
precision(1.923328437452, 3)
1.923
Short and easy variant
def truncate_float(value, digits_after_point=2):
pow_10 = 10 ** digits_after_point
return (float(int(value * pow_10))) / pow_10
>>> truncate_float(1.14333, 2)
>>> 1.14
>>> truncate_float(1.14777, 2)
>>> 1.14
>>> truncate_float(1.14777, 4)
>>> 1.1477
When using a pandas df this worked for me
import math
def truncate(number, digits) -> float:
stepper = 10.0 ** digits
return math.trunc(stepper * number) / stepper
df['trunc'] = df['float_val'].apply(lambda x: truncate(x,1))
df['trunc']=df['trunc'].map('{:.1f}'.format)
int(16.5);
this will give an integer value of 16, i.e. trunc, won't be able to specify decimals, but guess you can do that by
import math;
def trunc(invalue, digits):
return int(invalue*math.pow(10,digits))/math.pow(10,digits);
Here is an easy way:
def truncate(num, res=3):
return (floor(num*pow(10, res)+0.5))/pow(10, res)
for num = 1.923328437452, this outputs 1.923
def trunc(f,n):
return ('%.16f' % f)[:(n-16)]
A general and simple function to use:
def truncate_float(number, length):
"""Truncate float numbers, up to the number specified
in length that must be an integer"""
number = number * pow(10, length)
number = int(number)
number = float(number)
number /= pow(10, length)
return number
There is an easy workaround in python 3. Where to cut I defined with an help variable decPlace to make it easy to adapt.
f = 1.12345
decPlace= 4
f_cut = int(f * 10**decPlace) /10**decPlace
Output:
f = 1.1234
Hope it helps.
Most answers are way too complicated in my opinion, how about this?
digits = 2 # Specify how many digits you want
fnum = '122.485221'
truncated_float = float(fnum[:fnum.find('.') + digits + 1])
>>> 122.48
Simply scanning for the index of '.' and truncate as desired (no rounding).
Convert string to float as final step.
Or in your case if you get a float as input and want a string as output:
fnum = str(122.485221) # convert float to string first
truncated_float = fnum[:fnum.find('.') + digits + 1] # string output
I think a better version would be just to find the index of decimal point . and then to take the string slice accordingly:
def truncate(number, n_digits:int=1)->float:
'''
:param number: real number ℝ
:param n_digits: Maximum number of digits after the decimal point after truncation
:return: truncated floating point number with at least one digit after decimal point
'''
decimalIndex = str(number).find('.')
if decimalIndex == -1:
return float(number)
else:
return float(str(number)[:decimalIndex+n_digits+1])
int(1.923328437452 * 1000) / 1000
>>> 1.923
int(1.9239 * 1000) / 1000
>>> 1.923
By multiplying the number by 1000 (10 ^ 3 for 3 digits) we shift the decimal point 3 places to the right and get 1923.3284374520001. When we convert that to an int the fractional part 3284374520001 will be discarded. Then we undo the shifting of the decimal point again by dividing by 1000 which returns 1.923.
use numpy.round
import numpy as np
precision = 3
floats = [1.123123123, 2.321321321321]
new_float = np.round(floats, precision)
Something simple enough to fit in a list-comprehension, with no libraries or other external dependencies. For Python >=3.6, it's very simple to write with f-strings.
The idea is to let the string-conversion do the rounding to one more place than you need and then chop off the last digit.
>>> nout = 3 # desired number of digits in output
>>> [f'{x:.{nout+1}f}'[:-1] for x in [2/3, 4/5, 8/9, 9/8, 5/4, 3/2]]
['0.666', '0.800', '0.888', '1.125', '1.250', '1.500']
Of course, there is rounding happening here (namely for the fourth digit), but rounding at some point is unvoidable. In case the transition between truncation and rounding is relevant, here's a slightly better example:
>>> nacc = 6 # desired accuracy (maximum 15!)
>>> nout = 3 # desired number of digits in output
>>> [f'{x:.{nacc}f}'[:-(nacc-nout)] for x in [2.9999, 2.99999, 2.999999, 2.9999999]]
>>> ['2.999', '2.999', '2.999', '3.000']
Bonus: removing zeros on the right
>>> nout = 3 # desired number of digits in output
>>> [f'{x:.{nout+1}f}'[:-1].rstrip('0') for x in [2/3, 4/5, 8/9, 9/8, 5/4, 3/2]]
['0.666', '0.8', '0.888', '1.125', '1.25', '1.5']
The core idea given here seems to me to be the best approach for this problem.
Unfortunately, it has received less votes while the later answer that has more votes is not complete (as observed in the comments). Hopefully, the implementation below provides a short and complete solution for truncation.
def trunc(num, digits):
l = str(float(num)).split('.')
digits = min(len(l[1]), digits)
return l[0] + '.' + l[1][:digits]
which should take care of all corner cases found here and here.
Am also a python newbie and after making use of some bits and pieces here, I offer my two cents
print str(int(time.time()))+str(datetime.now().microsecond)[:3]
str(int(time.time())) will take the time epoch as int and convert it to string and join with...
str(datetime.now().microsecond)[:3] which returns the microseconds only, convert to string and truncate to first 3 chars
# value value to be truncated
# n number of values after decimal
value = 0.999782
n = 3
float(int(value*1en))*1e-n
I need to convert a binary input into a decimal integer. I know how to go from a decimal to a binary:
n = int(raw_input('enter a number: '))
print '{0:b}'.format(n)
I need to go in the reverse direction. My professor said that when he checks our code, he is going to input 11001, and he should get 25 back. I've looked through our notes, and I cannot figure out how to do this. Google and other internet resources haven't been much help either.
The biggest problem is that we are not allowed to use built-in functions. I understand why we are not allowed to use them, but it's making this problem much more difficult, since I know Python has a built-in function for binary to decimal.
You can use int and set the base to 2 (for binary):
>>> binary = raw_input('enter a number: ')
enter a number: 11001
>>> int(binary, 2)
25
>>>
However, if you cannot use int like that, then you could always do this:
binary = raw_input('enter a number: ')
decimal = 0
for digit in binary:
decimal = decimal*2 + int(digit)
print decimal
Below is a demonstration:
>>> binary = raw_input('enter a number: ')
enter a number: 11001
>>> decimal = 0
>>> for digit in binary:
... decimal = decimal*2 + int(digit)
...
>>> print decimal
25
>>>
Binary to Decimal
int(binaryString, 2)
Decimal to Binary
format(decimal ,"b")
There is actually a much faster alternative to convert binary numbers to decimal, based on artificial intelligence (linear regression) model:
Train an AI algorithm to convert 32-binary number to decimal based.
Predict a decimal representation from 32-binary.
See example and time comparison below:
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
import numpy as np
y = np.random.randint(0, 2**32, size=10_000)
def gen_x(y):
_x = bin(y)[2:]
n = 32 - len(_x)
return [int(sym) for sym in '0'*n + _x]
X = np.array([gen_x(x) for x in y])
model = LinearRegression()
model.fit(X, y)
def convert_bin_to_dec_ai(array):
return model.predict(array)
y_pred = convert_bin_to_dec_ai(X)
Time comparison:
This AI solution converts numbers almost x10 times faster than conventional way!
If you want/need to do it without int:
sum(int(c) * (2 ** i) for i, c in enumerate(s[::-1]))
This reverses the string (s[::-1]), gets each character c and its index i (for i, c in enumerate(), multiplies the integer of the character (int(c)) by two to the power of the index (2 ** i) then adds them all together (sum()).
I started working on this problem a long time ago, trying to write my own binary to decimal converter function. I don't actually know how to convert decimal to binary though! I just revisited it today and figured it out and this is what I came up with. I'm not sure if this is what you need, but here it is:
def __degree(number):
power = 1
while number % (10**power) != number:
power += 1
return power
def __getDigits(number):
digits = []
degree = __degree(number)
for x in range(0, degree):
digits.append(int(((number % (10**(degree-x))) - (number % (10**(degree-x-1)))) / (10**(degree-x-1))))
return digits
def binaryToDecimal(number):
list = __getDigits(number)
decimalValue = 0
for x in range(0, len(list)):
if (list[x] is 1):
decimalValue += 2**(len(list) - x - 1)
return decimalValue
Again, I'm still learning Python just on my own, hopefully this helps. The first function determines how many digits there are, the second function actually figures out they are and returns them in a list, and the third function is the only one you actually need to call, and it calculates the decimal value. If your teacher actually wanted you to write your own converter, this works, I haven't tested it with every number, but it seems to work perfectly! I'm sure you'll all find the bugs for me! So anyway, I just called it like:
binaryNum = int(input("Enter a binary number: "))
print(binaryToDecimal(binaryNum))
This prints out the correct result. Cheers!
The input may be string or integer.
num = 1000 #or num = '1000'
sum(map(lambda x: x[1]*(2**x[0]), enumerate(map(int, str(num))[::-1])))
# 8
a = input('Enter a binary number : ')
ar = [int(i) for i in a]
ar = ar[::-1]
res = []
for i in range(len(ar)):
res.append(ar[i]*(2**i))
sum_res = sum(res)
print('Decimal Number is : ',sum_res)
Using the power (**) function is a bit of a waste, so #user2555451's solution really is the way to go (Horner's method). Here's a fancy variation on it (less efficient, though, since the string needs to be reversed. The str-cast is there to allow for integers to be passed as well):
from itertools import accumulate, repeat
from operator import mul
def bin2dec(bin_str):
return sum(
int(n) * m for n, m in zip(
str(bin_str)[::-1],
accumulate((repeat(2)), func=mul, initial=1)))
I've seen a few questions about this already, but none that I read helped me actually understand why what I am trying to do is failing.
So I have a bunch of floating point values, and they have different precisions. Some are 0.1 others are 1.759374, etc. And I want to format them so they are ALL in the form of "+0.0000000E+00" I tried doing
number = '%1.7f' % oldnumber
but that didn't work. I thought what I was telling it to do was "one digit perfor the decimal point, and 7 after, float" but it doesn't work. I'm not really getting the examples in the docs, which don't seem to even bother with "before and after decimal point" issues, and I didn't find a question that was about before and after decimal point fixing.
Now, I know that some of my numbers are 0.0437 or similar, and I want them to appear as 4.3700000E-02 or something. I was sort of hoping it would do the E bit on it's own, but if it doesn't how do I do it?
Here is the exact line I have:
RealValConv = '%1.7g' % struct.unpack('!f', RealVal.decode('hex'))[0]
RealVal is a hex number that represents the value I want.
Also, this is in Python 2.7
>>> '{:.7e}'.format(0.00000000000000365913456789)
'3.6591346e-15'
You can use the scientific notation format: Something like this:
number = '%e' % oldnumber
>>> x = 1.759374
>>> print '%e' % x
1.759374e+00
>>>
>>> x = 1.79
>>> print '%e' % x
1.790000e+00
>>>
>>> x = 1.798775655
>>> print '%e' % x
1.798776e+00
>>>
Or, if you want to control precision, you can use the format method as sugged by #leon approach (+1).
>>> x = 1.759374
>>>
>>> print('{:.2e}'.format(x))
1.76e+00
>>>
>>> print('{:.10e}'.format(x))
1.7593740000e+00
>>>
>>> print('{:.4e}'.format(x))
1.7594e+00
>>>
I'm trying to display the output of my addition to more than 2 decimal places.
import time
import random
max_number = 1000000.0
random_time = random.randrange(1, max_number-1) / max_number
range_key = int(time.time()) + random_time
range_key
>>> 1347053222.790799
print range_key
>>> 1347053222.79
How can I print the full number?
If this were a function, how could I return the full number?
When turning a float into a string (printing does this automatically), python limits it to only the 12 most significant digits, plus the decimal point.
When returning the number from a function, you always get the full precision.
To print more digits (if available), use string formatting:
print '%f' % range_key # prints 1347053958.526874
That defaults to 6 digits, but you can specify more precision:
print '%.10f' % range_key # prints 1347053958.5268740654
Alternatively, python offers a newer string formatting method too:
print '{0:.10f}'.format(range_key) # prints 1347053958.5268740654
You already have the full number. Use a custom format specifier on output.
>>> print '%.15f' % range_key
1347053222.790798902511597
You'll find that if you hard-code the number of digits to print, you'll sometimes get too few or worse yet go past the floating-point precision and get meaningless digits at the end. The standard floating point number only has precision to about 15 digits. You can find out how many of those digits are to the right of the decimal point with this simple formula:
digits_right = 14 - int(math.log10(value))
Using that you can create an appropriate %f format:
fmt = '%%0.%df' % max(0, digits_right)
>>> f = 1/7.
>>> repr(f)
'0.14285714285714285'
>>> str(f)
'0.142857142857'
>>> f
0.14285714285714285
>>> print f
0.142857142857
>>> '%.15f' % f
'0.142857142857143'
How does one round a number UP in Python?
I tried round(number) but it rounds the number down. Example:
round(2.3) = 2.0
and not 3, as I would like.
The I tried int(number + .5) but it round the number down again! Example:
int(2.3 + .5) = 2
The math.ceil (ceiling) function returns the smallest integer higher or equal to x.
For Python 3:
import math
print(math.ceil(4.2))
For Python 2:
import math
print(int(math.ceil(4.2)))
I know this answer is for a question from a while back, but if you don't want to import math and you just want to round up, this works for me.
>>> int(21 / 5)
4
>>> int(21 / 5) + (21 % 5 > 0)
5
The first part becomes 4 and the second part evaluates to "True" if there is a remainder, which in addition True = 1; False = 0. So if there is no remainder, then it stays the same integer, but if there is a remainder it adds 1.
If working with integers, one way of rounding up is to take advantage of the fact that // rounds down: Just do the division on the negative number, then negate the answer. No import, floating point, or conditional needed.
rounded_up = -(-numerator // denominator)
For example:
>>> print(-(-101 // 5))
21
Interesting Python 2.x issue to keep in mind:
>>> import math
>>> math.ceil(4500/1000)
4.0
>>> math.ceil(4500/1000.0)
5.0
The problem is that dividing two ints in python produces another int and that's truncated before the ceiling call. You have to make one value a float (or cast) to get a correct result.
In javascript, the exact same code produces a different result:
console.log(Math.ceil(4500/1000));
5
You might also like numpy:
>>> import numpy as np
>>> np.ceil(2.3)
3.0
I'm not saying it's better than math, but if you were already using numpy for other purposes, you can keep your code consistent.
Anyway, just a detail I came across. I use numpy a lot and was surprised it didn't get mentioned, but of course the accepted answer works perfectly fine.
Use math.ceil to round up:
>>> import math
>>> math.ceil(5.4)
6.0
NOTE: The input should be float.
If you need an integer, call int to convert it:
>>> int(math.ceil(5.4))
6
BTW, use math.floor to round down and round to round to nearest integer.
>>> math.floor(4.4), math.floor(4.5), math.floor(5.4), math.floor(5.5)
(4.0, 4.0, 5.0, 5.0)
>>> round(4.4), round(4.5), round(5.4), round(5.5)
(4.0, 5.0, 5.0, 6.0)
>>> math.ceil(4.4), math.ceil(4.5), math.ceil(5.4), math.ceil(5.5)
(5.0, 5.0, 6.0, 6.0)
I am surprised nobody suggested
(numerator + denominator - 1) // denominator
for integer division with rounding up. Used to be the common way for C/C++/CUDA (cf. divup)
The syntax may not be as pythonic as one might like, but it is a powerful library.
https://docs.python.org/2/library/decimal.html
from decimal import *
print(int(Decimal(2.3).quantize(Decimal('1.'), rounding=ROUND_UP)))
For those who want to round up a / b and get integer:
Another variant using integer division is
def int_ceil(a, b):
return (a - 1) // b + 1
>>> int_ceil(19, 5)
4
>>> int_ceil(20, 5)
4
>>> int_ceil(21, 5)
5
Note: a and b must be non-negative integers
Here is a way using modulo and bool
n = 2.3
int(n) + bool(n%1)
Output:
3
Try this:
a = 211.0
print(int(a) + ((int(a) - a) != 0))
Be shure rounded value should be float
a = 8
b = 21
print math.ceil(a / b)
>>> 0
but
print math.ceil(float(a) / b)
>>> 1.0
The above answers are correct, however, importing the math module just for this one function usually feels like a bit of an overkill for me. Luckily, there is another way to do it:
g = 7/5
g = int(g) + (not g.is_integer())
True and False are interpreted as 1 and 0 in a statement involving numbers in python. g.is_interger() basically translates to g.has_no_decimal() or g == int(g). So the last statement in English reads round g down and add one if g has decimal.
In case anyone is looking to round up to a specific decimal place:
import math
def round_up(n, decimals=0):
multiplier = 10 ** decimals
return math.ceil(n * multiplier) / multiplier
Without importing math // using basic envionment:
a) method / class method
def ceil(fl):
return int(fl) + (1 if fl-int(fl) else 0)
def ceil(self, fl):
return int(fl) + (1 if fl-int(fl) else 0)
b) lambda:
ceil = lambda fl:int(fl)+(1 if fl-int(fl) else 0)
>>> def roundup(number):
... return round(number+.5)
>>> roundup(2.3)
3
>>> roundup(19.00000000001)
20
This function requires no modules.
x * -1 // 1 * -1
Confusing but it works: For x=7.1, you get 8.0. For x = -1.1, you get -1.0
No need to import a module.
For those who doesn't want to use import.
For a given list or any number:
x = [2, 2.1, 2.5, 3, 3.1, 3.5, 2.499,2.4999999999, 3.4999999,3.99999999999]
You must first evaluate if the number is equal to its integer, which always rounds down. If the result is True, you return the number, if is not, return the integer(number) + 1.
w = lambda x: x if x == int(x) else int(x)+1
[w(i) for i in z]
>>> [2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 3, 3, 4, 4]
Math logic:
If the number has decimal part: round_up - round_down == 1, always.
If the number doens't have decimal part: round_up - round_down == 0.
So:
round_up == x + round_down
With:
x == 1 if number != round_down
x == 0 if number == round_down
You are cutting the number in 2 parts, the integer and decimal. If decimal isn't 0, you add 1.
PS:I explained this in details since some comments above asked for that and I'm still noob here, so I can't comment.
If you don't want to import anything, you can always write your own simple function as:
def RoundUP(num):
if num== int(num):
return num
return int(num + 1)
To do it without any import:
>>> round_up = lambda num: int(num + 1) if int(num) != num else int(num)
>>> round_up(2.0)
2
>>> round_up(2.1)
3
I know this is from quite a while back, but I found a quite interesting answer, so here goes:
-round(-x-0.5)
This fixes the edges cases and works for both positive and negative numbers, and doesn't require any function import
Cheers
I'm surprised I haven't seen this answer yet round(x + 0.4999), so I'm going to put it down. Note that this works with any Python version. Changes made to the Python rounding scheme has made things difficult. See this post.
Without importing, I use:
def roundUp(num):
return round(num + 0.49)
testCases = list(x*0.1 for x in range(0, 50))
print(testCases)
for test in testCases:
print("{:5.2f} -> {:5.2f}".format(test, roundUp(test)))
Why this works
From the docs
For the built-in types supporting round(), values are rounded to the closest multiple of 10 to the power minus n; if two multiples are equally close, rounding is done toward the even choice
Therefore 2.5 gets rounded to 2 and 3.5 gets rounded to 4. If this was not the case then rounding up could be done by adding 0.5, but we want to avoid getting to the halfway point. So, if you add 0.4999 you will get close, but with enough margin to be rounded to what you would normally expect. Of course, this will fail if the x + 0.4999 is equal to [n].5000, but that is unlikely.
You could use round like this:
cost_per_person = round(150 / 2, 2)
You can use floor devision and add 1 to it.
2.3 // 2 + 1
when you operate 4500/1000 in python, result will be 4, because for default python asume as integer the result, logically:
4500/1000 = 4.5 --> int(4.5) = 4
and ceil of 4 obviouslly is 4
using 4500/1000.0 the result will be 4.5 and ceil of 4.5 --> 5
Using javascript you will recieve 4.5 as result of 4500/1000, because javascript asume only the result as "numeric type" and return a result directly as float
Good Luck!!
I think you are confusing the working mechanisms between int() and round().
int() always truncates the decimal numbers if a floating number is given; whereas round(), in case of 2.5 where 2 and 3 are both within equal distance from 2.5, Python returns whichever that is more away from the 0 point.
round(2.5) = 3
int(2.5) = 2
My share
I have tested print(-(-101 // 5)) = 21 given example above.
Now for rounding up:
101 * 19% = 19.19
I can not use ** so I spread the multiply to division:
(-(-101 //(1/0.19))) = 20
I'm basically a beginner at Python, but if you're just trying to round up instead of down why not do:
round(integer) + 1