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
