Mark R. Diggory wrote:
J.Pietschmann wrote:
No. If you cast the base into a double there is not much risk of overflow: double x = n; y=x*x; or y=((double)n)*((double)n); or even y=n*(double)n; (but avoid y=(double)n*n). Double mantissa has IIRC 52 bits, this should be good for integers up to 2^26=67108864 without loss of precision.
Is this correct, I've been reading (again, if I'm getting this correctly) the doubles mantissa is capable of supporting 15 -17 decimal places, 2^26 is only 8.
I meant: you can square integers up to 2^26 without loss of precision (due to truncation).
J.Pietschmann
Yes I do agree with you on that one.
-- Mark Diggory Software Developer Harvard MIT Data Center http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
