On 2005-06-23, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-06-23, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> C89 doesn't define the result of that, but "most" C compilers these
>> days will create a negative 0.
>>
>>> and (double)0x80000000 doesn't work,
>
> I think you meant something like
>
>   float f;
>   *((uint32_t*)&d) = 0xNNNNNNNN;

    *((uint32_t*)&f) = 0xNNNNNNNN;

It doesn't matter how many times one proofreads things like
that...

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  I will establish
                                  at               the first SHOPPING MALL in
                               visi.com            NUTLEY, New Jersey...
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Reply via email to