Subject: Re: accuracy of "long double"
To: None <>
From: Neil Booth <>
List: port-amd64
Date: 08/30/2007 07:29:34 wrote:-

>> Yes, no, yes.  :)  Rounding for all FP arithmetic is to double precision
>> by default.
> That's still (partially) unclear. You mean that, if I add two
> <long double>s and put the result in a <long double>, I won't
> get the extra precision I expect in the result because it will
> be truncated to (normal) <double> precision ?

Yes.  You can test this yourself of course:

#include <float.h>

volatile double y = DBL_EPSILON;
volatile long double z = LDBL_EPSILON;

int main (void)
  return (z > 0 && z + 1 == 1
	  && y > 0 && y + 1 != 1);

For me on NetBSD main returns 1.  Which makes me wonder whether
the definition of LDBL_EPSION on x86 NetBSD is wrong - shouldn't
it be the same as DBL_EPSILON on x86 NetBSD?

> If yes, I don't see the point of keeping <long double> 
> different from <double>?

Well, you do get greater exponent range.  But don't ask me,
it wasn't my decision.