On Sep 29, 2004, at 4:55 PM, James Giles wrote:
> There's no rule against all the results from Hendrickson's
> program being the same KIND number and for that correspond to
> single precision.
Though if single precision has 50 digits or more, then the number of
apps needing quad is probably pretty low. :-)
I have trouble imagining any real sense in which Dick's example "won't
do it", particularly as the purpose of his example is rather explicitly
for human perusal of what is available. Of course that's not how one
would write code to use directly in an application; applications tend
to do more interesting things with kind numbers than just print them
out.
If one wants to be pedantic, it is possible in principle for there to
be kind values that can't be returned by selected_real_kind unless you
specify a range requirement. I haven't seen any implementations
actually do that, but it isn't hard to imagine situations where such a
thing would be useful; could happen someday.
--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
[log in to unmask] | experience comes from bad judgment.
| -- Mark Twain
|