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 10:18:59

on 04.05.2010 at 15:44
 Stewart, Robert wrote :

> DE wrote:
>>  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();

> That only works for unsigned types.

it does work for bounded signed and unsigned integers, unbounded
unsigned integers and also for floating point values (with
denormalization)

so no, not that much

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