@atoponce I think the problem here is it may be considering that like a program version number. Which is one thing I *HATE* about the way version numbers are done. In program versions that's actually 9 and 11 versus 9 and 9 rather than just over 9.1 versus 9.9. I wish that would go away as a thing.

That said, yeah, it's still messing that up and should have figured it out better than that anyway. (There are some models that try to produce better math results, but since they're not actually doing math, results still vary.)

I find it incredibly ironic that 300+ watts are being spent to do things a calculator could do at 0.1 watts and still not getting it right a huge percentage of the time when all they truly need to do is pass it through a simple mathematical function.