[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Jun 2006 19:31:22 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
Abdulaziz Ghuloum scripsit:
> The test [for infinity] is obviously bogus since f==f+1.0 for large values of
> f.
> (try 1e16)
Oops, quite right.
The expression "f != 0.0 && f == f + f" will work, I think.
0.0 and NaN are rejected by the left side of "&&", and all
other finite values by the right side.
--
Andrew Watt on Microsoft: John Cowan
Never in the field of human computing address@hidden
has so much been paid by so many http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
to so few! (pace Winston Churchill)
- [Chicken-users] IEEE float arithmetic, John Cowan, 2006/06/19
- Re: [Chicken-users] IEEE float arithmetic, felix winkelmann, 2006/06/20
- Re: [Chicken-users] IEEE float arithmetic, John Cowan, 2006/06/20
- [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic, Abdulaziz Ghuloum, 2006/06/20
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic,
John Cowan <=
- [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic, Abdulaziz Ghuloum, 2006/06/20
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic, John Cowan, 2006/06/21
- Message not available
- Re: [q-lang-users] [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic, John Cowan, 2006/06/21
- [Chicken-users] Re: [q-lang-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic, Abdulaziz Ghuloum, 2006/06/21
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic, Thomas Chust, 2006/06/22
- Re: [q-lang-users] [Chicken-users] Re: IEEE float arithmetic, Albert Graef, 2006/06/21
- Re: [Chicken-users] IEEE float arithmetic, felix winkelmann, 2006/06/21
- Re: [Chicken-users] IEEE float arithmetic, John Cowan, 2006/06/21
- Re: [Chicken-users] IEEE float arithmetic, Mario Domenech Goulart, 2006/06/21
- Re: [Chicken-users] IEEE float arithmetic, John Cowan, 2006/06/21