Editor's Note: The following answer provides a simplistic solution that contains several implementation flaws (see Shafik Yaghmour's answer for a full explanation). Note that C++11 includes std::round, std::lround, and std::llround as builtins already.

There's no round() in the C++98 standard library. You can write one yourself though. The following is an implementation of round-half-up:

double round(double d)
{
  return floor(d + 0.5);
}

The probable reason there is no round function in the C++98 standard library is that it can in fact be implemented in different ways. The above is one common way but there are others such as round-to-even, which is less biased and generally better if you're going to do a lot of rounding; it's a bit more complex to implement though.

It may be worth noting that if you wanted an integer result from the rounding you don't need to pass it through either ceil or floor. I.e.,

int round_int( double r ) {
    return (r > 0.0) ? (r + 0.5) : (r - 0.5); 
}

It's usually implemented as floor(value + 0.5).

Edit: and it's probably not called round since there are at least three rounding algorithms I know of: round to zero, round to closest integer, and banker's rounding. You are asking for round to closest integer.

You could round to n digits precision with:

double round( double x )
{
const double sd = 1000; //for accuracy to 3 decimal places
return int(x*sd + (x<0? -0.5 : 0.5))/sd;
}

These days it shouldn't be a problem to use a C++11 compiler which includes a C99/C++11 math library. But then the question becomes: which rounding function do you pick?

C99/C++11 round() is often not actually the rounding function you want. It uses a funky rounding mode that rounds away from 0 as a tie-break on half-way cases (+-xxx.5000). If you do specifically want that rounding mode, or you're targeting a C++ implementation where round() is faster than rint(), then use it (or emulate its behaviour with one of the other answers on this question which took it at face value and carefully reproduced that specific rounding behaviour.)

round()'s rounding is different from the IEEE754 default round to nearest mode with even as a tie-break. Nearest-even avoids statistical bias in the average magnitude of numbers, but does bias towards even numbers.

There are two math library rounding functions that use the current default rounding mode: std::nearbyint() and std::rint(), both added in C99/C++11, so they're available any time std::round() is. The only difference is that nearbyint never raises FE_INEXACT.

Prefer rint() for performance reasons: gcc and clang both inline it more easily, but gcc never inlines nearbyint() (even with -ffast-math)

gcc/clang for x86-64 and AArch64

I put some test functions on Matt Godbolt's Compiler Explorer, where you can see source + asm output (for multiple compilers). For more about reading compiler output, see this Q&A, and Matt's CppCon2017 talk: “What Has My Compiler Done for Me Lately? Unbolting the Compiler's Lid”,

In FP code, it's usually a big win to inline small functions. Especially on non-Windows, where the standard calling convention has no call-preserved registers, so the compiler can't keep any FP values in XMM registers across a call. So even if you don't really know asm, you can still easily see whether it's just a tail-call to the library function or whether it inlined to one or two math instructions. Anything that inlines to one or two instructions is better than a function call (for this particular task on x86 or ARM).

On x86, anything that inlines to SSE4.1 roundsd can auto-vectorize with SSE4.1 roundpd (or AVX vroundpd). (FP->integer conversions are also available in packed SIMD form, except for FP->64-bit integer which requires AVX512.)

• std::nearbyint():

  • x86 clang: inlines to a single insn with -msse4.1.
  • x86 gcc: inlines to a single insn only with -msse4.1 -ffast-math, and only on gcc 5.4 and earlier. Later gcc never inlines it (maybe they didn't realize that one of the immediate bits can suppress the inexact exception? That's what clang uses, but older gcc uses the same immediate as for rint when it does inline it)
  • AArch64 gcc6.3: inlines to a single insn by default.

• std::rint:

  • x86 clang: inlines to a single insn with -msse4.1
  • x86 gcc7: inlines to a single insn with -msse4.1. (Without SSE4.1, inlines to several instructions)
  • x86 gcc6.x and earlier: inlines to a single insn with -ffast-math -msse4.1.
  • AArch64 gcc: inlines to a single insn by default

• std::round:

  • x86 clang: doesn't inline
  • x86 gcc: inlines to multiple instructions with -ffast-math -msse4.1, requiring two vector constants.
  • AArch64 gcc: inlines to a single instruction (HW support for this rounding mode as well as IEEE default and most others.)

• std::floor / std::ceil / std::trunc

  • x86 clang: inlines to a single insn with -msse4.1
  • x86 gcc7.x: inlines to a single insn with -msse4.1
  • x86 gcc6.x and earlier: inlines to a single insn with -ffast-math -msse4.1
  • AArch64 gcc: inlines by default to a single instruction

Rounding to int / long / long long:

You have two options here: use lrint (like rint but returns long, or long long for llrint), or use an FP->FP rounding function and then convert to an integer type the normal way (with truncation). Some compilers optimize one way better than the other.

long l = lrint(x);

int  i = (int)rint(x);

Note that int i = lrint(x) converts float or double -> long first, and then truncates the integer to int. This makes a difference for out-of-range integers: Undefined Behaviour in C++, but well-defined for the x86 FP -> int instructions (which the compiler will emit unless it sees the UB at compile time while doing constant propagation, then it's allowed to make code that breaks if it's ever executed).

On x86, an FP->integer conversion that overflows the integer produces INT_MIN or LLONG_MIN (a bit-pattern of 0x8000000 or the 64-bit equivalent, with just the sign-bit set). Intel calls this the "integer indefinite" value. (See the cvttsd2si manual entry, the SSE2 instruction that converts (with truncation) scalar double to signed integer. It's available with 32-bit or 64-bit integer destination (in 64-bit mode only). There's also a cvtsd2si (convert with current rounding mode), which is what we'd like the compiler to emit, but unfortunately gcc and clang won't do that without -ffast-math.

Also beware that FP to/from unsigned int / long is less efficient on x86 (without AVX512). Conversion to 32-bit unsigned on a 64-bit machine is pretty cheap; just convert to 64-bit signed and truncate. But otherwise it's significantly slower.

• x86 clang with/without -ffast-math -msse4.1: (int/long)rint inlines to roundsd / cvttsd2si. (missed optimization to cvtsd2si). lrint doesn't inline at all.

• x86 gcc6.x and earlier without -ffast-math: neither way inlines

• x86 gcc7 without -ffast-math: (int/long)rint rounds and converts separately (with 2 total instructions of SSE4.1 is enabled, otherwise with a bunch of code inlined for rint without roundsd). lrint doesn't inline.

• x86 gcc with -ffast-math: all ways inline to cvtsd2si (optimal), no need for SSE4.1.

• AArch64 gcc6.3 without -ffast-math: (int/long)rint inlines to 2 instructions. lrint doesn't inline

• AArch64 gcc6.3 with -ffast-math: (int/long)rint compiles to a call to lrint. lrint doesn't inline. This may be a missed optimization unless the two instructions we get without -ffast-math are very slow.

Function double round(double) with the use of the modf function:

double round(double x)
{
    using namespace std;

    if ((numeric_limits<double>::max() - 0.5) <= x)
        return numeric_limits<double>::max();

    if ((-1*std::numeric_limits<double>::max() + 0.5) > x)
        return (-1*std::numeric_limits<double>::max());

    double intpart;
    double fractpart = modf(x, &intpart);

    if (fractpart >= 0.5)
        return (intpart + 1);
    else if (fractpart >= -0.5)
        return intpart;
    else
        return (intpart - 1);
    }

To be compile clean, includes "math.h" and "limits" are necessary. The function works according to a following rounding schema:

• round of 5.0 is 5.0
• round of 3.8 is 4.0
• round of 2.3 is 2.0
• round of 1.5 is 2.0
• round of 0.501 is 1.0
• round of 0.5 is 1.0
• round of 0.499 is 0.0
• round of 0.01 is 0.0
• round of 0.0 is 0.0
• round of -0.01 is -0.0
• round of -0.499 is -0.0
• round of -0.5 is -0.0
• round of -0.501 is -1.0
• round of -1.5 is -1.0
• round of -2.3 is -2.0
• round of -3.8 is -4.0
• round of -5.0 is -5.0

As pointed out in comments and other answers, the ISO C++ standard library did not add round() until ISO C++11, when this function was pulled in by reference to the ISO C99 standard math library.

For positive operands in [½, ub] round(x) == floor (x + 0.5), where ub is 2²³ for float when mapped to IEEE-754 (2008) binary32, and 2⁵² for double when it is mapped to IEEE-754 (2008) binary64. The numbers 23 and 52 correspond to the number of stored mantissa bits in these two floating-point formats. For positive operands in [+0, ½) round(x) == 0, and for positive operands in (ub, +∞] round(x) == x. As the function is symmetric about the x-axis, negative arguments x can be handled according to round(-x) == -round(x).

This leads to the compact code below. It compiles into a reasonable number of machine instructions across various platforms. I observed the most compact code on GPUs, where my_roundf() requires about a dozen instructions. Depending on processor architecture and toolchain, this floating-point based approach could be either faster or slower than the integer-based implementation from newlib referenced in a different answer.

I tested my_roundf() exhaustively against the newlib roundf() implementation using Intel compiler version 13, with both /fp:strict and /fp:fast. I also checked that the newlib version matches the roundf() in the mathimf library of the Intel compiler. Exhaustive testing is not possible for double-precision round(), however the code is structurally identical to the single-precision implementation.

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <math.h>

float my_roundf (float x)
{
    const float half = 0.5f;
    const float one = 2 * half;
    const float lbound = half;
    const float ubound = 1L << 23;
    float a, f, r, s, t;
    s = (x < 0) ? (-one) : one;
    a = x * s;
    t = (a < lbound) ? x : s;
    f = (a < lbound) ? 0 : floorf (a + half);
    r = (a > ubound) ? x : (t * f);
    return r;
}

double my_round (double x)
{
    const double half = 0.5;
    const double one = 2 * half;
    const double lbound = half;
    const double ubound = 1ULL << 52;
    double a, f, r, s, t;
    s = (x < 0) ? (-one) : one;
    a = x * s;
    t = (a < lbound) ? x : s;
    f = (a < lbound) ? 0 : floor (a + half);
    r = (a > ubound) ? x : (t * f);
    return r;
}

uint32_t float_as_uint (float a)
{
    uint32_t r;
    memcpy (&r, &a, sizeof(r));
    return r;
}

float uint_as_float (uint32_t a)
{
    float r;
    memcpy (&r, &a, sizeof(r));
    return r;
}

float newlib_roundf (float x)
{
    uint32_t w;
    int exponent_less_127;

    w = float_as_uint(x);
    /* Extract exponent field. */
    exponent_less_127 = (int)((w & 0x7f800000) >> 23) - 127;
    if (exponent_less_127 < 23) {
        if (exponent_less_127 < 0) {
            /* Extract sign bit. */
            w &= 0x80000000;
            if (exponent_less_127 == -1) {
                /* Result is +1.0 or -1.0. */
                w |= ((uint32_t)127 << 23);
            }
        } else {
            uint32_t exponent_mask = 0x007fffff >> exponent_less_127;
            if ((w & exponent_mask) == 0) {
                /* x has an integral value. */
                return x;
            }
            w += 0x00400000 >> exponent_less_127;
            w &= ~exponent_mask;
        }
    } else {
        if (exponent_less_127 == 128) {
            /* x is NaN or infinite so raise FE_INVALID by adding */
            return x + x;
        } else {
            return x;
        }
    }
    x = uint_as_float (w);
    return x;
}

int main (void)
{
    uint32_t argi, resi, refi;
    float arg, res, ref;

    argi = 0;
    do {
        arg = uint_as_float (argi);
        ref = newlib_roundf (arg);
        res = my_roundf (arg);
        resi = float_as_uint (res);
        refi = float_as_uint (ref);
        if (resi != refi) { // check for identical bit pattern
            printf ("!!!! arg=%08x  res=%08x  ref=%08x\n", argi, resi, refi);
            return EXIT_FAILURE;
        }
        argi++;
    } while (argi);
    return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}

Since C++ 11 simply:

#include <cmath>
std::round(1.1)

or to get int

static_cast<int>(std::round(1.1))

round_f for ARM with math

static inline float round_f(float value)
{
    float rep;
    asm volatile ("vrinta.f32 %0,%1" : "=t"(rep) : "t"(value));
    return rep;
}

round_f for ARM without math

union f__raw {
    struct {
        uint32_t massa  :23;
        uint32_t order  :8;
        uint32_t sign   :1;
    };
    int32_t     i_raw;
    float       f_raw;
};

float round_f(float value)
{
    union f__raw raw;
    int32_t exx;
    uint32_t ex_mask;
    raw.f_raw = value;
    exx = raw.order - 126;
    if (exx < 0) {
        raw.i_raw &= 0x80000000;
    } else if (exx < 24) {
        ex_mask = 0x00ffffff >> exx;
        raw.i_raw += 0x00800000 >> exx;
        if (exx == 0) ex_mask >>= 1;
        raw.i_raw &= ~ex_mask;
    };
    return  raw.f_raw;
};

Best way to rounding off a floating value by "n" decimal places, is as following with in O(1) time:-

We have to round off the value by 3 places i.e. n=3.So,

float a=47.8732355;
printf("%.3f",a);

I did this:

#include <cmath.h>

using namespace std;

double roundh(double number, int place){

    /* place = decimal point. Putting in 0 will make it round to whole
                              number. putting in 1 will round to the
                              tenths digit.
    */

    number *= 10^place;
    int istack = (int)floor(number);
    int out = number-istack;
    if (out < 0.5){
        floor(number);
        number /= 10^place;
        return number;
    }
    if (out > 0.4) {
        ceil(number);
        number /= 10^place;
        return number;
    }
}