Linas Vepstas writes: > > + f *= FLOAT_RADIX; > > Is this right? isn't there a "DOUBLE_RADIX" ?
I think the C89 standard defines FLT_RADIX only. -- Brian Gough
Linas Vepstas writes: > > + f *= FLOAT_RADIX; > > Is this right? isn't there a "DOUBLE_RADIX" ?
I think the C89 standard defines FLT_RADIX only. -- Brian Gough