On Monday, 22 July 2013 at 21:02:30 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
Always amusing to run into those little quirks of parts of the
language you've never worked with before ...
I just realized that while e.g. int.min gives a negative value,
the floating point equivalent, e.g. double.min, gives a very
small positive value -- I guess the smallest possible positive
value.
I guess this is intentional, so I thought I'd ask why -- it's a
little unintuitive after the integral type behaviour.
Also, how can I get the truly least value of a floating point
number? I guess with e.g. -double.max ... ?
Pretty certain bearophile's been campaigning for the removal of
these. Or am I confusing it with something else?
