The Javadoc for the Math class provides some information on the differences between the two classes:
Unlike some of the numeric methods of class
StrictMath, all implementations of the equivalent functions of classMathare not defined to return the bit-for-bit same results. This relaxation permits better-performing implementations where strict reproducibility is not required.By default many of the
Mathmethods simply call the equivalent method inStrictMathfor their implementation. Code generators are encouraged to use platform-specific native libraries or microprocessor instructions, where available, to provide higher-performance implementations ofMathmethods. Such higher-performance implementations still must conform to the specification forMath.
Therefore, the Math class lays out some rules about what certain operations should do, but they do not demand that the exact same results be returned in all implementations of the libraries.
This allows for specific implementations of the libraries to return similiar, but not the exact same result if, for example, the Math.cos class is called. This would allow for platform-specific implementations (such as using x86 floating point and, say, SPARC floating point) which may return different results.
(Refer to the Software Implementations section of the Sine article in Wikipedia for some examples of platform-specific implementations.)
However, with StrictMath, the results returned by different implementations must return the same result. This would be desirable for instances where the reproducibility of results on different platforms are required.
What is the difference between import static java.lang.Math. ...
How do I properly use the java.lang.Math? - Stack Overflow
Is the Math class a standard class of Java? - Stack Overflow
Amazing java.lang.math performance - Performance Tuning - JVM Gaming
Videos
The Javadoc for the Math class provides some information on the differences between the two classes:
Unlike some of the numeric methods of class
StrictMath, all implementations of the equivalent functions of classMathare not defined to return the bit-for-bit same results. This relaxation permits better-performing implementations where strict reproducibility is not required.By default many of the
Mathmethods simply call the equivalent method inStrictMathfor their implementation. Code generators are encouraged to use platform-specific native libraries or microprocessor instructions, where available, to provide higher-performance implementations ofMathmethods. Such higher-performance implementations still must conform to the specification forMath.
Therefore, the Math class lays out some rules about what certain operations should do, but they do not demand that the exact same results be returned in all implementations of the libraries.
This allows for specific implementations of the libraries to return similiar, but not the exact same result if, for example, the Math.cos class is called. This would allow for platform-specific implementations (such as using x86 floating point and, say, SPARC floating point) which may return different results.
(Refer to the Software Implementations section of the Sine article in Wikipedia for some examples of platform-specific implementations.)
However, with StrictMath, the results returned by different implementations must return the same result. This would be desirable for instances where the reproducibility of results on different platforms are required.
@ntoskrnl As somebody who is working with JVM internals, I would like to second your opinion that "intrinsics don't necessarily behave the same way as StrictMath methods". To find out (or prove) it, we can just write a simple test.
Take Math.pow for example, examining the Java code for
java.lang.Math.pow(double a, double b), we will see:
public static double pow(double a, double b) {
return StrictMath.pow(a, b); // default impl. delegates to StrictMath
}
But the JVM is free to implement it with intrinsics or runtime calls, thus the returning result can be different from what we would expect from StrictMath.pow.
And the following code shows this calling Math.pow() against StrictMath.pow()
//Strict.java, testing StrictMath.pow against Math.pow
import java.util.Random;
public class Strict {
static double testIt(double x, double y) {
return Math.pow(x, y);
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception{
final double[] vs = new double[100];
final double[] xs = new double[100];
final double[] ys = new double[100];
final Random random = new Random();
// compute StrictMath.pow results;
for (int i = 0; i<100; i++) {
xs[i] = random.nextDouble();
ys[i] = random.nextDouble();
vs[i] = StrictMath.pow(xs[i], ys[i]);
}
boolean printed_compiled = false;
boolean ever_diff = false;
long len = 1000000;
long start;
long elapsed;
while (true) {
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
double blackhole = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < len; i++) {
int idx = i % 100;
double res = testIt(xs[idx], ys[idx]);
if (i >= 0 && i<100) {
//presumably interpreted
if (vs[idx] != res && (!Double.isNaN(res) || !Double.isNaN(vs[idx]))) {
System.out.println(idx + ":\tInterpreted:" + xs[idx] + "^" + ys[idx] + "=" + res);
System.out.println(idx + ":\tStrict pow : " + xs[idx] + "^" + ys[idx] + "=" + vs[idx] + "\n");
}
}
if (i >= 250000 && i<250100 && !printed_compiled) {
//presumably compiled at this time
if (vs[idx] != res && (!Double.isNaN(res) || !Double.isNaN(vs[idx]))) {
System.out.println(idx + ":\tcompiled :" + xs[idx] + "^" + ys[idx] + "=" + res);
System.out.println(idx + ":\tStrict pow :" + xs[idx] + "^" + ys[idx] + "=" + vs[idx] + "\n");
ever_diff = true;
}
}
}
elapsed = System.currentTimeMillis() - start;
System.out.println(elapsed + " ms ");
if (!printed_compiled && ever_diff) {
printed_compiled = true;
return;
}
}
}
}
I ran this test with OpenJDK 8u5-b31 and got the result below:
10: Interpreted:0.1845936372497491^0.01608930867480518=0.9731817015518033
10: Strict pow : 0.1845936372497491^0.01608930867480518=0.9731817015518032
41: Interpreted:0.7281259501809544^0.9414406865385655=0.7417808233050295
41: Strict pow : 0.7281259501809544^0.9414406865385655=0.7417808233050294
49: Interpreted:0.0727813262968815^0.09866028976654662=0.7721942440239148
49: Strict pow : 0.0727813262968815^0.09866028976654662=0.7721942440239149
70: Interpreted:0.6574309575966407^0.759887845481148=0.7270872740201638
70: Strict pow : 0.6574309575966407^0.759887845481148=0.7270872740201637
82: Interpreted:0.08662340816125613^0.4216580281197062=0.3564883826345057
82: Strict pow : 0.08662340816125613^0.4216580281197062=0.3564883826345058
92: Interpreted:0.20224488115245098^0.7158182878844233=0.31851834311978916
92: Strict pow : 0.20224488115245098^0.7158182878844233=0.3185183431197892
10: compiled :0.1845936372497491^0.01608930867480518=0.9731817015518033
10: Strict pow :0.1845936372497491^0.01608930867480518=0.9731817015518032
41: compiled :0.7281259501809544^0.9414406865385655=0.7417808233050295
41: Strict pow :0.7281259501809544^0.9414406865385655=0.7417808233050294
49: compiled :0.0727813262968815^0.09866028976654662=0.7721942440239148
49: Strict pow :0.0727813262968815^0.09866028976654662=0.7721942440239149
70: compiled :0.6574309575966407^0.759887845481148=0.7270872740201638
70: Strict pow :0.6574309575966407^0.759887845481148=0.7270872740201637
82: compiled :0.08662340816125613^0.4216580281197062=0.3564883826345057
82: Strict pow :0.08662340816125613^0.4216580281197062=0.3564883826345058
92: compiled :0.20224488115245098^0.7158182878844233=0.31851834311978916
92: Strict pow :0.20224488115245098^0.7158182878844233=0.3185183431197892
290 ms
Please note that Random is used to generate the x and y values, so your mileage will vary from run to run. But good news is that at least the results of compiled version of Math.pow match those of interpreted version of Math.pow. (Off topic: even this consistency was only enforced in 2012 with a series of bug fixes from OpenJDK side.)
The reason?
Well, it's because OpenJDK uses intrinsics and runtime functions to implement Math.pow (and other math functions), instead of just executing the Java code. The main purpose is to take advantage of x87 instructions so that performance for the computation can be boosted. As a result, StrictMath.pow is never called from Math.pow at runtime (for the OpenJDK version that we just used, to be precise).
And this arragement is totally legitimate according to the Javadoc of Math class (also quoted by @coobird above):
The class Math contains methods for performing basic numeric operations such as the elementary exponential, logarithm, square root, and trigonometric functions.
Unlike some of the numeric methods of class StrictMath, all implementations of the equivalent functions of class Math are not defined to return the bit-for-bit same results. This relaxation permits better-performing implementations where strict reproducibility is not required.
By default many of the Math methods simply call the equivalent method in StrictMath for their implementation. Code generators are encouraged to use platform-specific native libraries or microprocessor instructions, where available, to provide higher-performance implementations of Math methods. Such higher-performance implementations still must conform to the specification for Math.
And the conclusion? Well, for languages with dynamic code generation such as Java, please make sure what you see from the 'static' code matches what is executed at runtime. Your eyes can sometimes really mislead you.
You don't specifically need to import java.lang.Math, or any part of java.lang, and your snippet maybe contains some copy / paste errors, as explained in the comment by khelwood.
If we want to think about a more generic question on the topic if you are importing the whole class you are using more memory and if you are not using all the imported methods it doesn't make sense to import it all, it would be just a waste of resources.
Using an advanced IDE like IntelliJ you can enable automatic import and code analysis and this kind of best practises will be automatically suggested and enforced in your code with warnings and errors provided directly from the IDE. My suggestion is adopting a similar solution because it will speed up and improve your coding right away.
Or, if you don't like the idea of automatic import, you can use the Optimize Import function and obtain a similar result with a simple shortcut (control + alt + o).
The general way to introduce classes: import java.lang.Math.*;
The way to introduce classes statically: import static java.lang.Math.*;
The difference is that:
Generally, the introduction requires the use of ClassName.method(); to call the static method in the class;
public class Test {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(Math.sqrt(4)); //Need to add the class name prefix
}
}
After static introduction, use method(); directly to use static method.
import static java.lang.Math.*;
public class Test {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(sqrt(4)); //Call the method directly
}
}
Yes you must first convert it into an Integer, Double, Float, etc in order to do a multiplication on such. So just do
int v = Integer.parseInt(value.trim());
Then
System.out.println("The square of the number"+v+"is"+ (v * v));
Also using operators has nothing to do with Math library. Math library is used like so:
double d = Double.parseDouble(value.trim());
Math.pow(d,2.0); //which does the same thing above
There are two approaches to go about this program -
1) Read the input as String and then convert it to int or
2) Read the input as int(or double?) itself.
Following code shows how you can read the input as int and perform the operation.
Note the code change (value*value) in your sysout statement. When you concatenate any value to a string, it get treated as string, and hence you are getting the error. Put it in parenthesis such that before concatenating, actual value*value operation is performed.
public class squared {
public static void main(String[] args){
Scanner number = new Scanner(System.in);
System.out.println("What number do you want to find the square of?");
int value = number.nextInt();
System.out.println("The square of the number"+value+"is"+ (value * value));
}
}
Talking about Math.pow(), it doesn't serve any different purpose here. Using it is same as the way you have done here.
would Math fall into this category?
Yes. It is documented as part of the JDK javadoc (since JDK 1.0) so you are guaranteed that it will exist in any JRE you'll ever encounter.
Note that since it resides in java.lang, you do not have to import it explicitly; you could:
import java.lang.Math;
but since all classes in java.lang are automatically imported (that includes String and Integer for instance), you need not do that.
This is a peculiar class in the sense that it cannot be instantiated and it only contains static methods and constants; apart from that you are sure to have it available, and that methods and constants obey the defined contract.
It comes with the SDK, if that is what "standard" meant.
It is part of the java.lang package, thus does not require import.
I had this line of code:
int generator = 1 + (int) (Math.random() * 19);
http://puu.sh/sGVps/b318650d6b.png
The program I create works perfectly but i was wondering why I didn't need to import lang.math despite using random.