comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Re: 0=1 (Double precision/Long64)

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: 0=1 (Double precision/Long64)

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: 0=1 (Double precision/Long64) [message #69899 is a reply to message #69897]

Thu, 25 February 2010 12:14

wlandsman
Messages: 743
Registered: June 2000

Senior Member

On Feb 25, 1:08 pm, pp <pp.pente...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think that converting integer types to floating point types is the
> usual way languages deal with operations that mix them, so this is not
> an IDL specific issue.

Ideally, I think one would want two numeric variables, a and b, to be
considered equal if

double(a) = double(b) *and* long64(a) = long64(b)

since the double variable is higher precision in allowing fractional
values, but the long64 variable is higher precision in preserving all
digits of very large integers. But I agree that the IDL approach is
standard among languages that allow comparison of data of different
types. --Wayne

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: 0=1 (Double precision/Long64) By: rogass on Thu, 25 February 2010 14:30
		Re: 0=1 (Double precision/Long64) By: wlandsman on Thu, 25 February 2010 12:14
		Re: 0=1 (Double precision/Long64) By: penteado on Thu, 25 February 2010 10:08

Previous Topic:	Print 2 arrays side by side in one file
Next Topic:	Re: MTPR error when I try to apply a mask

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Oct 11 12:23:41 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00861 seconds