>Ohh, I see. Your initial question was really vague, now that I see
>what you were asking.
sorry
>You'd just have to convert each element of the
>array separately.
I found the formatting options, they are in std.format..
(I was apparently searching for the 'g' option.. )
this seems to work (usin
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 7:39 PM, Saaa wrote:
>>
>> Um, doubles don't have infinite precision. See those digits that it
>> output? That's all you get. Those are the only digits that are
>> necessary because those are the only digits that are *stored*. Just
>> because it's followed by almost 300
"Jarrett Billingsley" wrote in message
news:mailman.51.1247352795.14071.digitalmars-d-le...@puremagic.com...
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Saaa wrote:
>>> double d[2] = [ 0, 1, double.max];
>>> char[] c = format(d);
>>>
>>> How do I get c to represent full precision?
>>>
>>> "[0,1,1.7976931
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Saaa wrote:
>> double d[2] = [ 0, 1, double.max];
>> char[] c = format(d);
>>
>> How do I get c to represent full precision?
>>
>> "[0,1,1.7976931348623157e+308]" // but then with double.max being
>> represented fully
>
>> You want a 309-digit number consisting most
> double d[2] = [ 0, 1, double.max];
> char[] c = format(d);
>
> How do I get c to represent full precision?
>
> "[0,1,1.7976931348623157e+308]" // but then with double.max being
> represented fully
> You want a 309-digit number consisting mostly of 0s?
Yes, but only if they are necessary.
0 does
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Saaa wrote:
> double d[2] = [ 0, 1, double.max];
> char[] c = format(d);
>
> How do I get c to represent full precision?
>
> "[0,1,1.7976931348623157e+308]" // but then with double.max being
> represented fully
You want a 309-digit number consisting mostly of 0s?
double d[2] = [ 0, 1, double.max];
char[] c = format(d);
How do I get c to represent full precision?
"[0,1,1.7976931348623157e+308]" // but then with double.max being
represented fully
BLS wrote:
> Robert Fraser wrote:
>> BLS wrote:
>>> Vladimir Voinkov wrote:
std.regex can't be used in compile time function call. It's quite
frustrating...
>>>
>>> see dsource.org .. afaik there is a compile time regex project. hth
>>
>> http://www.dsource.org/projects/scregexp
>>
>>
> >> see dsource.org .. afaik there is a compile time regex project. hth
> >
> > http://www.dsource.org/projects/scregexp
> >
> > But the generated functions aren't CTFE-compatible AFAIK. A CTFE regex
> > engine would be um... "tricky" to say the least. About 50GB of memory
> > tricky (on DMD,
