Hi Daniel,
>> But, for what you're testing, that's the behavior I'd expect -- once
>> you've reached the precision of a double, you'll only get the closest
>> representation possible (and of course a 64-bit long is more precise than
>> a double since there's no floating point to represent). Al
Hi Matt, and everyone:
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 01:00:47PM -0500, Matt Wilmas wrote:
> unless I'm missing something,
> you're talking about converting long/int to double/float. That's the
> opposite of this thread subject, which is how to convert a double to a
> long when it's out of the ran
Hi Dan,
- Original Message -
From: "Daniel Convissor"
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009
Hi Matt:
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 09:30:42AM -0500, Matt Wilmas wrote:
But of course with
doubles, precision has been lost long before 2^63 anyway, as far as
increments of 1 (it's 1024 at 2^63).
I j
Hi Matt:
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 09:30:42AM -0500, Matt Wilmas wrote:
>
> But of course with
> doubles, precision has been lost long before 2^63 anyway, as far as
> increments of 1 (it's 1024 at 2^63).
I just ran into these issues in PHP 5.2.8 on 64 bit Linux while running
examples I'm using
Hi all,
Since noticing and reporting last year [1] different behavior when casting
out-of-range doubles to int after the DVAL_TO_LVAL() macro was updated, I've
wondered how to get the behavior I observed, and thought could be relied on
(that was wrong to think, since it was un- or implementati
