Christopher D . Lewis wrote:
> Someone posted a question as to the size of number which a scalar
> would tolerate. When I wanted to know what size boundaries I faced in
> certain variable types in C, I wrote a little program that added 1 to
> a variable until n+1 was less than n, at which point I
PM
To: Christopher D. Lewis
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Size of number in scalar
You'll be waiting a long time. Perl quickly moves into scientific
notation and can handle arbitrarily large values. I wrote a similar
program a while back and got bored with it when the count hit
Ben Siders wrote:
> You'll be waiting a long time. Perl quickly moves into scientific
> notation and can handle arbitrarily large values. I wrote a similar
> program a while back and got bored with it when the count hit about
> 10^17. :)
if you don't want to wait but still want to try to push P
Chris Said:
> Someone posted a question as to the size of number which a
> scalar would
> tolerate.
I guess I missed this thread, so I hope I'm not repeating information. :)
> Perl seems to
> tolerate quite a bit of this, as the app has been churning away,
> printing every so many number ju
You'll be waiting a long time. Perl quickly moves into scientific
notation and can handle arbitrarily large values. I wrote a similar
program a while back and got bored with it when the count hit about
10^17. :)
Christopher D. Lewis wrote:
Someone posted a question as to the size of number w
