This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computer science Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet Cleanup : Computer science articles needing attention Computer science articles needing expert attention Copyedit : Computing Expand : Computer science Infobox : Computer science articles without infoboxes Maintain : Timeline of computing 2020–present Photo : Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists) Computing articles needing images Stubs : Computer science stubs Unreferenced : WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs Project-related : Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}} Mathematics Low‑priority This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics Low This redirect has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

I'm not sure I agree with the idea that we always round to an even number. I think it is more common, natural and useful to round up in the event of a half-integer. 137.205.139.149 22:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. In fortran 95 the standard is to round up. 90.185.194.71 (talk) 13:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the MathWorld site uses [x] but this is quite unusual: [x] has more often been used for integer part in the past. One notation that I have seen often is ${\displaystyle \lfloor x\rceil }$, although for some reason I find this faintly disturbing. More old-fashioned is ${\displaystyle \Vert x\Vert }$. I'll find some references. Richard Pinch (talk) 19:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The graph shown is a bit confusing, in that the point on the x-axis crossed by the y-axis is -0.5 rather than 0, and there are no other x-axis labels. It's hard to see the primary difference from the floor function, this way. --67.242.12.135 (talk) 11:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image is quite terrible. I'm removing it. -71.195.18.33 (talk) 18:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen the convention that the round function rounds half-integers to the nearest even integer -- is there any citation for this being "usual"? --Joel B. Lewis (talk) 00:55, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is in the IEEE 754 floating point standard implemented on practically every computer, see rounding for various alternatives. Dmcq (talk) 02:28, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think it's misleading to say that this is "usually" done when the preceding sentence sets the context as mathematics, rather than computer science. Do you have any objection if I reword along the following lines? "To avoid ambiguity when operating on half-integers, a rounding rule must be chosen. On most computer implementations, the selected rule is to round half-integers to the nearest even integer -- for example, ..... (This is in accordance with the IEEE 754 floating point standards.)" Joel B. Lewis (talk) 02:55, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've not actually ever come across a need to answer the question in a mathematical context, a single point is a set of measure zero. Perhaps you mean statistics or accounting or children rounding sums or something like that? I've no objection to you expanding the article. Dmcq (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[4.5] = 5 and [2.5] = 3. The article lists [4.5] = 4 and [2.5] = 2, which is totally wrong. That is not how rounding works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.169.179.61 (talk) 04:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It depends what the rounding does. This is the standard round half to even rounding used in IEEE floating point implementations. Dmcq (talk) 13:20, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This should clearly be merged into the Rounding article. --Macrakis (talk) 14:04, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The Rounding article seems of higher quality and more extensive. This one could go. Olli Niemitalo (talk) 07:41, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also see little value to having a stand-alone article on one particular rounding method. I have added merge tags to both articles in the hopes of attracting someone who wants to do the actual work involved :). --JBL (talk) 22:17, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree on the merge. Vincent Lefèvre (talk) 00:02, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect done. There was nothing here that wasn't covered in the Rounding article more completely and more correctly. --Macrakis (talk) 20:28, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]