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