On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 00:50:32 +0200 (CEST), Guillaume Melquiond
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are sure c_l is the nearest 'long double'. Now we want the nearest
'double'. Can we simply do:
double c_d() { return c_l(); }
No, we can't.
We already agreed that a different definition must be provided
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 22:04:53 +0200 (CEST), Guillaume Melquiond
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I know this part of the standard. But it doesn't apply in the situation I
was describing. I was describing the case of a constant whose decimal (and
consequently binary) representation is not finite. It
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:30:48 +0200 (CEST), Guillaume Melquiond
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Paul A Bristow wrote:
[snip]
| [*] It is not even true. Due to double rounding troubles,
| using a higher precision can lead to a value that is not the
| nearest number.
Is this
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Gennaro Prota wrote:
| [*] It is not even true. Due to double rounding troubles,
| using a higher precision can lead to a value that is not the
| nearest number.
Is this true even when you have a few more digits than necessary?
Kahan's article suggested to me
