[ANSI-Smalltalk] Agenda items...

[Andres Valloud]

Paolo

On Dec 3, 2007 7:59 AM, Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini at lu.unisi.ch> wrote:


> But we're on violent agreement on this.  emax is, with no possible way
> to disagree, the highest exponent that can be seen for a valid float, in
> the sign/mantissa/exponent representation of the float itself.  This is
> unambiguous.



Ok... then we can leave poor emax alone... for a while.  Later, we can
decide to agree violently on something else :)...



> It is just that the definition *of the mantissa* is not what you're
> accustomed to.  You believe that emax should be the exponent of a number
> that is realizable with doubles, while LIA is clear that it is not so
> because it defines the mantissa to be <1.
>
>

Hmmm... well, but even then, we have that the integer 2^emax is a double,
but 2^(emax + 1) is not a double.  Is perhaps the convenience of coincidence
the confusing part here?  I didn't mean to write such amounts in any
particular mantissa notation.

Andres.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.openskills.org/pipermail/ansi-smalltalk/attachments/20071203/4d5af343/attachment-0001.htm