Re: Decimal: Formal review begins.

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2025-01-17 21:31:06

Christopher Kormanyos wrote:
>   > Question:
> > I've noticed that this:
> >
> 1.23456789098787237982792742932938492382342382342002934932_d
> f
> > Compiles, although it truncates the> value to 1.234568. Would it make>
> sense to somehow tell the user "hey,> this literal is too long"
> It would absolutely make sense, butthen you would need the same thing
> tohappen for float, double and longdouble in the Standard, which isn'tgoing to
> happen.
> So Decimal follows suit.

That's not the same. Base 2 floats don't need a fixed number of decimal
digits to be represented unambiguously, but decimal floats do.