On Feb 13, 10:07 pm, Paul Pluzhnikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> "mathieu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Just to be sure I am double-checking here.
> > Is there a way to make gcc produce a warning when a code is
> > dereferencing an end iterator ? Or does this involve too much static
> > ana
"mathieu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just to be sure I am double-checking here.
> Is there a way to make gcc produce a warning when a code is
> dereferencing an end iterator ? Or does this involve too much static
> analysis ?
The latter.
You can however ask newer versions of g++ to catch
Wilhelm Korrengk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> while (1.e-10 < i) { ... }
> Unfortunately 1.e-10 is not equal to 0;
I think you may be missing the point: 'i' will *never* be equal to 0.
You have to define appropriate epsilon (1.e-10 was just an example).
> That`s why i can "increment" with d
Thank you, I did not know that float can be strange even if they
are small...
> while (1.e-10 < i) { ... }
Unfortunately 1.e-10 is not equal to 0;
That`s why i can "increment" with d += 0.1 up to 0 even if -0.1
is the point I wanted to stop.
while still looks ugly
Thank you
Wilhelm Korrengk
_
Wilhelm Korrengk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> even if I`m not THE Pro coding c++
> I thought I`m already better not to ask the following:
... code expecting double equality ...
> It does not matter whether i is positive or negative while will
> stop when i is 0.
>
> But is doesn`t.
You need t
