Getting The Decimal Part Of A Number In ColdFusion

Posted May 7, 2007 at 8:54 AM

Tags: ColdFusion

Over the weekend, I was fooling around with ColdFusion date/time values when I thought it would be useful to grab the decimal value of the date (the time part). Then it occurred to me - I don't think I have ever done this before. Now, I don't mean grabbing the actual fraction, I mean getting the integer value that is right of the decimal point.

After some good pacing, the only way to do this I could come up with through ColdFusion string manipulation. Since ColdFusion stores all simple values as strings, this makes manipulating values as strings quite natural. But, even when it came to string manipulation, I found two different ways to do this: one way uses a regular expression to strip out the decimal (and leading zero), the other way treats the value as a decimal-delimited list.

Here is the regular expression version:

 Launch code in new window » Download code as text file »

  • <cffunction
  • name="GetDecimal"
  • access="public"
  • returntype="numeric"
  • output="false"
  • hint="Returns the decimal value of the given number (as an integer).">
  •  
  • <!--- Define arguments. --->
  • <cfargument
  • name="Value"
  • type="numeric"
  • required="true"
  • />
  •  
  • <!---
  • Once we have the numeric decimal value, we can
  • convert it to a string so that we can use a regular
  • expression replace to strip out the starting zero
  • and decimal point.
  • --->
  • <cfreturn
  • ToString(
  • ARGUMENTS.Value - Fix( ARGUMENTS.Value )
  • ).ReplaceFirst(
  • "^0?\.",
  • ""
  • )
  • />
  • </cffunction>

In this version, I am getting the decimal value but subtracting the fix()'d value from the actual value. This should result in a zero-leading decimal value. Then, I convert it to a string (just in case) and strip out the leading zero and decimal point. This results in the integer form of the decimal:

 Launch code in new window » Download code as text file »

  • <!--- Get decimal values values. --->
  • #GetDecimal( 134.5464 )#
  • #GetDecimal( 134 )#
  • #GetDecimal( 134.34464 )#
  • #GetDecimal( 134.45444554445 )#

... results in:

5464
0
34464
45444554445

Notice that the second value, 134, results in the decimal value, 0.

In this next version, we treat the value as a decimal-point-delimited list. By doing that, we can just grab the last list item to get the decimal value as an integer:

 Launch code in new window » Download code as text file »

  • <cffunction
  • name="GetDecimal2"
  • access="public"
  • returntype="numeric"
  • output="false"
  • hint="Returns the decimal value of the given number (as an integer).">
  •  
  • <!--- Define arguments. --->
  • <cfargument
  • name="Value"
  • type="numeric"
  • required="true"
  • />
  •  
  • <!---
  • To get the decimal value, we are going to treate the
  • value as a list with a decimal-point delimiter. When
  • doing this, we will append our own value to make sure
  • that the list has at least TWO (maybe three if there is
  • already a decimal place) list items.
  • --->
  • <cfreturn
  • ListGetAt( (ARGUMENTS.Value & ".0"), 2, "." )
  • />
  • </cffunction>

Ok, so now we have two different approaches, which do we use? Time for some speed tests. Now, I know that I get a lot of crap for running CFLoop speed tests (not true load bearing speed tests), but hey come on, I don't get enough sleep for that sort of thing :) Take it with a grain of salt if you like.

 Launch code in new window » Download code as text file »

  • <!--- Test the ColdFusion regular expression method. --->
  • <cftimer
  • type="OUTLINE"
  • label="Partial Math Method And RegEx">
  •  
  • <cfloop
  • index="intI"
  • from="1"
  • to="1000"
  • step="1">
  •  
  • <!---
  • Get a random decimal value to make sure
  • that ColdFusion is not just optimizing
  • the compiled code.
  • --->
  • <cfset intDecimal = GetDecimal(
  • "1." &
  • RandRange( 1, 9 )
  • ) />
  •  
  • </cfloop>
  •  
  • </cftimer>
  •  
  •  
  • <!--- Test the decimal-delimited-list method. --->
  • <cftimer
  • type="OUTLINE"
  • label="Delimited List Method">
  •  
  • <cfloop
  • index="intI"
  • from="1"
  • to="1000"
  • step="1">
  •  
  • <!---
  • Get a random decimal value to make sure
  • that ColdFusion is not just optimizing
  • the compiled code.
  • --->
  • <cfset intDecimal = GetDecimal2(
  • "1." &
  • RandRange( 1, 9 )
  • ) />
  •  
  • </cfloop>
  •  
  • </cftimer>

Running the above speed tests, the delimited list method ran 2 to 3 times faster than the regular expression method (23-47ms vs. 74-123ms). Thinking about it, after the fact, this makes a lot of sense. The list method uses no math and no regular expressions; it just parses the number as a string and grabs part of its value. There is very easy to do. In the first version, I am actually doing math. No wonder it is slower.

Download Code Snippet ZIP File

Post Comment  |  Ask Ben  |  Permalink  |  Other Searches  |  Print Page



Learning ColdFusion 9 - ColdFusion 9 tutorials, samples, examples, demos

Reader Comments

May 7, 2007 at 9:18 AM // reply »
5 Comments

I didn't do speed tests, but why not this?

<cfset number = 3.14159 />
<cfset decimal = number - int(number) />
<cfdump var="#decimal#">


May 7, 2007 at 9:38 AM // reply »
5,406 Comments

@Ryan,

That gives me:

0.14159

... what I wanted to get was just

14159

But this is basically doing the same thing as my Fix() method. Int() itself makes me a little nervous because it actually rounds, where as Fix() just strips off the decimal.


da
May 7, 2007 at 9:54 AM // reply »
1 Comments

hi try using listLast() a with "." as the delimiter.


May 7, 2007 at 9:56 AM // reply »
5,406 Comments

Good suggestion. ListGetAt(... 2), in this case is the same as ListLast()... but ListLast() is less typing :)


May 7, 2007 at 9:58 AM // reply »
5,406 Comments

Oh wait, no, it;s not the same thing (which is why I didn't use it). Think of this scenario:

4

I append ".0" to that to get:

4.0

ListGetAt(.. 2) in this case is the same as ListLast(). However, if my initial value is:

4.3

... and then I append ".0" to get:

4.3.0,

... then ListGetAt( ... 2) will give me "3", while ListLast() will get me "0".

I need to get ListGetAt() to deal with cases where I have a decimal point already vs. cases where I am dealing with a whole number.


Nelson Winters
May 7, 2007 at 10:48 AM // reply »
1 Comments

You may find this a little more straightforward:

#val(listRest(ARGUMENTS.Value, "."))#


May 7, 2007 at 10:51 AM // reply »
5,406 Comments

@Nelson,

Not a bad idea. Thanks.


guest
Oct 23, 2007 at 2:02 PM // reply »
1 Comments

Why not use REVERSE(FIX(REVERSE(num)))?


Post Comment  |  Ask Ben

Recent Blog Comments
Jul 4, 2009 at 9:42 AM
FLV 404 Error On Windows 2003 Server
I bookmarked this page. Thanks for given this great post.... ... read »
Jul 4, 2009 at 4:00 AM
Terms Of Service / Privacy Policy Document Generator
thanks ben, I'm not a big fan of contracts so to find your no no-nesense ToS generator has helped me no end. all the best matt ... read »
Justice
Jul 3, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Create A Running Average Without Storing Individual Values
@Ben, I think you're going about this the wrong way. You're trying to use complicated techniques when there is a simple and beautiful technique readily available (a la Gary Funk's comment). Instead ... read »
Bob
Jul 3, 2009 at 9:19 PM
Project HUGE: Huge In A Hurry - Get Big - Phase 3 / Week 1
a good technical explanation http://crossfitphoenix.typepad.com/crossfit_phoenix_forging_/the-overhead-squat.html ... read »
Jul 3, 2009 at 9:03 PM
Create A Running Average Without Storing Individual Values
If I wanted to do this and only carry two numbers, I'd keep track of the sum and N. Then you are pretty much accurate all the time. average = (sum + new_number) / (N + 1) But all this was in a for ... read »
Roland Collins
Jul 3, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Create A Running Average Without Storing Individual Values
@Martin - not just floating point though. Depending on what langauge you're working in, decimals can cause just as many headaches if they're not precise enough. But again, for most applications, th ... read »
Isnogood
Jul 3, 2009 at 7:16 PM
Project HUGE: Huge In A Hurry - Get Big - Phase 3 / Week 1
Watch this http://www.nsca-lift.org/videos/default.shtml ... read »
Aaron
Jul 3, 2009 at 7:13 PM
Project HUGE: Get Big, Phase One (Chat Waterbury - Huge In A Hurry)
I've just finished the 3rd week of phase 3, and have to agree that the overhead squats are hard. I think this is most due to the wide grip on which places more pressure on your upper back. Only this ... read »