[chuck-users] negative zero

[Stephen Sinclair]

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 2:25 AM, Robert Poor <rdpoor at gmail.com> wrote:
> Kas is exactly right, but I'm accustomed to languages that provide a test
> for negative zero.  (On the other hand, I have yet to find compelling reason
> that I need to do so.)

Keep in mind that ChucK's operators are implemented in C++, so there's
likely to be a lot of similarity to how C++ handles numbers.

Steve


> On 28 Feb 2009, at 22:02, Kassen wrote:
>
> Steve;
>
>>
>> It's weirdness, but I can't imagine a program in any language I know
>> of actually having trouble parsing -0.0.
>>
>
> Aren't situations like this the reason why we have standards for the
> representation of floating point numbers? I seem to remember something like
> that.
>
> Ah, here it is;
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_754
>
> Negative zero is a part of that standard. Sticking to that standard, even if
> it's slightly weird, will probably prevent issues more than cause them, I'd
> imagine.
>
> Yours,
> Kas.
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
>
>