Re: [boost] Proposal: Safe Double

From: John E. Potter (jpotter_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-04-25 06:34:19

On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Kevin Atkinson wrote:

> The only real issue, in my view, is what SMALL_VAL should be.

Isn't that a killer issue?  My numbers are about 1E100, what is
SMALL_VAL?  Tomorrow they are about 1E-100, what is SMALL_VAL?

IMO, the problem has been around forever and those who need a
solution have one.  Relative error is a partial answer, but
even that is application dependent.

The name safe_double will only give a false sense of security
to those who do not understand the problem.

John