home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: mail2news.demon.co.uk!genesis.demon.co.uk
- From: Lawrence Kirby <fred@genesis.demon.co.uk>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
- Subject: Re: Defining accuracy
- Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 00:31:15 GMT
- Organization: none
- Message-ID: <827800275snz@genesis.demon.co.uk>
- References: <DoKBM0.8L3.B.midge@bath.ac.uk> <827684758snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <4j6pkf$e68@airdmhor.gen.nz>
- Reply-To: fred@genesis.demon.co.uk
- X-NNTP-Posting-Host: genesis.demon.co.uk
- X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
- X-Mail2News-Path: genesis.demon.co.uk
-
- In article <4j6pkf$e68@airdmhor.gen.nz>
- gumboot@airdmhor.gen.nz "Simon Hosie" writes:
-
- >Lawrence Kirby:
- >> In article <DoKBM0.8L3.B.midge@bath.ac.uk> py3heh@bath.ac.uk "H E Harmer"
- > writes:
- >
- >> >Is there a way of defining the precision of the 'double' and 'long double'
- >> >variables when compiling with an ANSI C compiler? I am looking to
- >> >hopefully doubling it or better.
- >
- >> Generally no - the compiler defines the precision of the various floating
- >> point types. It typically corresponds to what the hardare supports.
- >
- > Couldn't you check the values in limits.h and typedef the type that fits,
- >or give an error or take the best fit if you can't find anything?
-
- The question was to double the precision of long double, which this
- clearly won't do.
-
- --
- -----------------------------------------
- Lawrence Kirby | fred@genesis.demon.co.uk
- Wilts, England | 70734.126@compuserve.com
- -----------------------------------------
-