Re: [boost] [numeric_limits] min() for floating point versus integers (Was: [xint] Third release is ready, requesting preliminary review)

Subject: Re: [boost] [numeric_limits] min() for floating point versus integers (Was: [xint] Third release is ready, requesting preliminary review)
From: DE (satan66613_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-04 07:43:02

on 04.05.2010 at 15:34
 Stewart, Robert wrote :

> Frank Mori Hess wrote:
>>
>> Speaking of numeric_limits, anyone know why they defined
>> numeric_limits::min()
>> to mean something completely different for floating and integer types?
>>
>> numeric_limits<double>::min is:  2.22507e-308
>> numeric_limits<int>::min is:  -2147483648

> That is a pain, isn't it?  I can only assume it was to avoid adding
> yet more attributes.  (You'd need biggest, smallest, maximum, and
> minimum, or some such set to express everything.)  Floating point
> types don't have asymmetrical ranges like integral types.

not that much

  typedef std::numeric_limits<type> traits;
  const type realy_min = traits::is_integer ? traits::min() : -traits::max();

-- 
Pavel
P.S.
if you notice a grammar mistake or weird phrasing in my message
please point it out