Your comment is deeply misleading. Floating point is mostly just fixed point plus some rules for automatically moving the decimal point. The point is that depending how you express the formula, you need to "expand the size of the space to prevent decimals from being used" (what do you even mean by that, if your answer has no exact binary representation? how would you express 1/7, or 10000/7, or 65536/7?) by spectacularly more or less.
If you think I'm wrong: Can you code the quadratic formula using integer or other fixed-point math, and demonstrate why it doesn't need the attention to bad numerical conditioning noted in the parent?
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you somewhere; but this is basically what I do for a living, so I don't think I'm wrong. I have carefully re-read my comments above, and would urge you to do the same.
Again: Can you write the quadratic formula in the way that you think is better (in pseudocode, or a language of your choice), and give examples of inputs where it performs better than floating point? If you don't do this and I'm wrong, then you're missing the opportunity to teach me (and all the people I'm misleading with my comments) something. If I'm right, then you're missing the opportunity to learn something yourself.
If you think I'm wrong: Can you code the quadratic formula using integer or other fixed-point math, and demonstrate why it doesn't need the attention to bad numerical conditioning noted in the parent?