Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #35836
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Fwd: Re: double == double |
| Date | 2016-10-19 21:30 -0400 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <nu96n0$eqr$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <md5:/ly77XHCxjkwLJNg81+qIg==> <nu8nek$mbu$2@dont-email.me> |
On 10/19/2016 5:10 PM, Eric Sosman wrote: > (A final point: All this argument over the sign of nothing leaves > me, I confess, a bit perplexed. However, those with more numerical > sophistication find the distinction between +0 and -0 to be of great > practical importance. William Kahan is particularly vehement on the > topic; look for his presentation titled "Branch Cuts for Complex > Elementary Functions or Much Ado About Nothing's Sign Bit," and > bring more mathematical prowess to your reading than I can. :) With the specification for operations then I don't think the existence of -0.0 has much impact on practical programming. Ones complement with not special handling (like in old CDC Cyber) is a PITA and resulting in weird code like adding zero to an integer before comparing to zero to convert -0 to +0. Arne
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Fwd: Re: double == double Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-10-19 17:10 -0400
Re: Fwd: Re: double == double Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-10-19 21:30 -0400
Re: Fwd: Re: double == double Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-10-20 07:54 -0400
Re: Fwd: Re: double == double Michael Jung <miju@golem.phantasia.org> - 2016-10-20 20:59 +0200
Re: Fwd: Re: double == double Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-10-20 15:37 -0400
Re: Fwd: Re: double == double Michael Jung <miju@golem.phantasia.org> - 2016-10-21 19:53 +0200
csiph-web