On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 10:12 +0200, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> 1937.966 not being representable by double so you get the next
> closest value.
Boris, this is not true. When I print out the original value 1937.966 in
different IEEE floating point representations, I get the following
results:
as double (64 bits): 1937.966000
as float (32 bits): 1937.965942
HTH,
Axel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
