http://silvermace.com/2009/06/fun-with-numeric_limits-min/ Danushka "silvermace" Abeysuriya Sun, 11 Mar 2012 21:38:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://silvermace.com/2009/06/fun-with-numeric_limits-min/comment-page-1/#comment-2230 Jonathan Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:13:18 +0000 http://www.silvermace.com/?p=66#comment-2230 I agree with Ed. Isn't that what min was supposed to do? I agree with Ed. Isn’t that what min was supposed to do?

]]> http://silvermace.com/2009/06/fun-with-numeric_limits-min/comment-page-1/#comment-80 Ed Smith-Rowland Sat, 17 Apr 2010 04:41:43 +0000 http://www.silvermace.com/?p=66#comment-80 I always thought this was strange and couterintuitive. They added std::numeric_limits::lowest() to C++-0x that does what min *really* should have done. I always thought this was strange and couterintuitive.
They added std::numeric_limits::lowest() to C++-0x that does what min *really* should have done.

]]> http://silvermace.com/2009/06/fun-with-numeric_limits-min/comment-page-1/#comment-79 EOP Exercise Round-Up: Chapter 2 « C++Next Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:50:08 +0000 http://www.silvermace.com/?p=66#comment-79 [...] for any integral type. Only the max() comparision is necessary for unsigned types. Because of the strange behavior of numeric_limits<T>::min when T is a floating type, a different implementation would be [...] [...] for any integral type. Only the max() comparision is necessary for unsigned types. Because of the strange behavior of numeric_limits<T>::min when T is a floating type, a different implementation would be [...]

]]>