G
gouqizi.lvcha
Hi, All:
I wonder what is the smallest positive double numbers in C in 32 bit
CPU?
Rick
I wonder what is the smallest positive double numbers in C in 32 bit
CPU?
Rick
[email protected] said:I wonder what is the smallest positive double numbers in C in
32 bit CPU?
[email protected] said:I wonder what is the smallest positive double numbers in C in 32 bit
CPU?
I wonder what is the smallest positive double numbers in C
in 32 bit CPU?
If you have IEEE gradual underflow enabled on your system, subnormalGrumble said:DBL_MIN yields the smallest normalized, finite representable value
of type double. DBL_EPSILON yields the smallest X of type double
such that 1.0 + X != 1.0.
(Source www.dinkumware.com)
Grumble said:DBL_MIN yields the smallest normalized, finite representable value
of type double. DBL_EPSILON yields the smallest X of type double
such that 1.0 + X != 1.0.
(Source www.dinkumware.com)
I wonder what is the smallest positive double number is
in C in 32 bit CPU?
#include <stdio.h>> cat main.c
x = 4.94066e-324> gcc -Wall -std=c99 -pedantic -o main main.c
> ./main
Jean-Claude Arbaut said:You question is also tricky for another reason: usually a C compiler handles
float and double numbers, but the Pentium processor can work with extended
precision (that can be set by an asm instruction, maybe no accessible from
C, and certainly not in C standard).
long double?
Jean-Claude Arbaut said:On 23/06/2005 10:35, Grumble wrote:
If the compiler knows of this type, yes.
long double has been standard, ever since there was a standard.
We usually assume standard C here, unless otherwise stated.
If you're stating something that's only intended to be true
for one of C89 or C99 or K&R, then it's best to specify which.
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.