Does "float" always occupy 32 bits

[chandanlinster]

As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size). But
chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
"THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
USING".
Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
machines?

[Skarmander]

Re: Does "float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

chandanlinster wrote:

As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size). But
chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
"THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
USING".
Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
machines?
>

Yes.

Although the IEEE single-precision type is the most common implementation of
float, this is not required. The standard only requires a minimum range and
minimum precision. Implementations can optionally signal that they implement
IEC 60559, a revision of IEEE 754.

In practice, most programs do not depend on the particular size of a float;
the ones that assume are usually those who also assume an int is 32 bits, so
floats and ints can be stored interchangeably . Needless to say, these are
not portable assumptions, and rarely appropriate, let alone necessary.

S.

[Philip Potter]

Re: Does "float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

"chandanlinster " <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrote in message
news:1157379273 .635173.126280@ e3g2000cwe.goog legroups.com...

As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size).

This is not guaranteed.

But
chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
"THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
USING".
Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
machines?

Yes.

Philip

[rramesh1@gmail.com]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Hi Guys.

I have a AMD-64 turion running debian Linux with gcc & here is what I
got..

char:1
short:2
long:8
float:4
double:8
long double:16

Here are my compiler options..

Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++ ,java,fortran,o bjc,obj-c++,ada,treelan g
--prefix=/usr --enable-shared --with-system-zlib --libexecdir=/usr/lib
--without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix --enable-nls
--program-suffix=-4.1 --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu
--enable-libstdcxx-debug --enable-java-awt=gtk --enable-gtk-cairo
--with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/jre
--enable-mpfr --enable-checking=releas e x86_64-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.1.2 20060613 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-5)

Cheers
/R

Philip Potter wrote:

"chandanlinster " <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrote in message
news:1157379273 .635173.126280@ e3g2000cwe.goog legroups.com...

As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size).

>
This is not guaranteed.
>

But
chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
"THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
USING".
Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
machines?

>
Yes.
>
Philip

[chandanlinster]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Thanks everybody for providing the solutions.

[Keith Thompson]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

"chandanlinster " <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrite s:

As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size). But
chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
"THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
USING".
Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
machines?

Potentially, yes.

I've never heard of a C implementation where float is not 32 bits
(i.e., where sizeof(float) * CHAR_BIT != 32), but such implementations
could easily exist.

In any case, there's no real reason or need to assume that float is 32
bits. The compiler knows how big a float is so you don't need to
worry about it.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[Ben Pfaff]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.orgwrites :

"chandanlinster " <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrite s:

>As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
>follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size). But
>chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
> "THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
>USING".
>Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
>machines?

>
Potentially, yes.
>
I've never heard of a C implementation where float is not 32 bits
(i.e., where sizeof(float) * CHAR_BIT != 32), but such implementations
could easily exist.

I don't think that float could be much smaller than 32 bits. By
my calculations, a floating point number represented in the
format that the Standard expects would need approximately 28 bits
to have the required range and precision.
--
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan

[Keith Thompson]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanfor d.eduwrites:

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.orgwrites :

>"chandanlinste r" <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrite s:

>>As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
>>follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size). But
>>chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
>> "THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
>>USING".
>>Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
>>machines?

>>
>Potentially, yes.
>>
>I've never heard of a C implementation where float is not 32 bits
>(i.e., where sizeof(float) * CHAR_BIT != 32), but such implementations
>could easily exist.

>
I don't think that float could be much smaller than 32 bits. By
my calculations, a floating point number represented in the
format that the Standard expects would need approximately 28 bits
to have the required range and precision.

Sure, but float could easily be larger than 32 bits.

And, in fact, contrary to what I wrote above, I've worked on machines
where float is 64 bits (and double is 64 bits, and long double is 128
bits). These were Cray vector machines, where the native word size is
64 bits.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[Ben Pfaff]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.orgwrites :

Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanfor d.eduwrites:

>Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.orgwrites :

>>I've never heard of a C implementation where float is not 32 bits
>>(i.e., where sizeof(float) * CHAR_BIT != 32), but such implementations
>>could easily exist.

>>
>I don't think that float could be much smaller than 32 bits. By
>my calculations, a floating point number represented in the
>format that the Standard expects would need approximately 28 bits
>to have the required range and precision.

>
Sure, but float could easily be larger than 32 bits.

Yes, I should have added that. I didn't mean to sound contradictory.

And, in fact, contrary to what I wrote above, I've worked on machines
where float is 64 bits (and double is 64 bits, and long double is 128
bits). These were Cray vector machines, where the native word size is
64 bits.

Right.
--
"I should killfile you where you stand, worthless human." --Kaz

[Dik T. Winter]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

In article <lnu03n9qoq.fsf @nuthaus.mib.or gKeith Thompson <kst-u@mib.orgwrites :

"chandanlinster " <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrite s:

....

Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
machines?

>
Potentially, yes.
>
I've never heard of a C implementation where float is not 32 bits
(i.e., where sizeof(float) * CHAR_BIT != 32), but such implementations
could easily exist.

I have used them. sizeof(float) == 8.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/

[Neil]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Keith Thompson wrote:

"chandanlinster " <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrite s:

>As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
>follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size). But
>chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
> "THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
>USING".
>Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
>machines?

>
Potentially, yes.
>
I've never heard of a C implementation where float is not 32 bits
(i.e., where sizeof(float) * CHAR_BIT != 32), but such implementations
could easily exist.
>
In any case, there's no real reason or need to assume that float is 32
bits. The compiler knows how big a float is so you don't need to
worry about it.
>

The Hi-Tech compiler for the PIC gives you the option of 24 or 32 bit
floats. I am not sure what ANSI says about that.

[Keith Thompson]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Neil <NeilKurzm@worl dnet.att.netwri tes:

Keith Thompson wrote:

>"chandanlinste r" <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrite s:

>>As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
>>follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size). But
>>chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
>> "THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
>>USING".
>>Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
>>machines?

>Potentially, yes.
>I've never heard of a C implementation where float is not 32 bits
>(i.e., where sizeof(float) * CHAR_BIT != 32), but such implementations
>could easily exist.
>In any case, there's no real reason or need to assume that float is
>32
>bits. The compiler knows how big a float is so you don't need to
>worry about it.

>
The Hi-Tech compiler for the PIC gives you the option of 24 or 32 bit
floats. I am not sure what ANSI says about that.

It doesn't directly say anything, but I don't believe it's possible to
meet the standard's requirements for type float in 24 bits. By my
calculations you need at least 27 bits (1 sign bit, 20 mantissa bits,
6 exponent bits).

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[Malcolm]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits




"Keith Thompson" <kst-u@mib.orgwrote in message
news:lnlkox7eo4 .fsf@nuthaus.mi b.org...

Neil <NeilKurzm@worl dnet.att.netwri tes:

>Keith Thompson wrote:

>>"chandanlinst er" <chandanlinster @gmail.comwrite s:
>>>As far as I know floating point variables, that are declared as float
>>>follow IEEE format representation (which is 32-bit in size). But
>>>chapter1-page no 9 of the book "The C programming language" states that
>>> "THE RANGE OF BOTH int AND float DEPENDS ON THE MACHINE YOU ARE
>>>USING".
>>>Does this mean "float" variables have different sizes on different
>>>machines?
>>Potentially , yes.
>>I've never heard of a C implementation where float is not 32 bits
>>(i.e., where sizeof(float) * CHAR_BIT != 32), but such implementations
>>could easily exist.
>>In any case, there's no real reason or need to assume that float is
>>32
>>bits. The compiler knows how big a float is so you don't need to
>>worry about it.

>>
>The Hi-Tech compiler for the PIC gives you the option of 24 or 32 bit
>floats. I am not sure what ANSI says about that.

>
It doesn't directly say anything, but I don't believe it's possible to
meet the standard's requirements for type float in 24 bits. By my
calculations you need at least 27 bits (1 sign bit, 20 mantissa bits,
6 exponent bits).
>

Easy.Your 24 bits index into an array of double-precision 64 bit values.
Since the user isn't guaranteed more than 64 K of memory, you've done it.
--

https://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm

freeware games to download.

[Joe Wright]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Keith Thompson wrote:

Neil <NeilKurzm@worl dnet.att.netwri tes:

[ snip ]

>The Hi-Tech compiler for the PIC gives you the option of 24 or 32 bit
>floats. I am not sure what ANSI says about that.

>
It doesn't directly say anything, but I don't believe it's possible to
meet the standard's requirements for type float in 24 bits. By my
calculations you need at least 27 bits (1 sign bit, 20 mantissa bits,
6 exponent bits).
>

Without regard to the Standard's requirements..

IEEE 754 has an extra bit. Float on my Sun and x86 iron is 32 bits and
includes a sign, 8 exponent bits and a 24-bit mantissa. They squeeze 33
bits into 32 by assuming the high order bit of a normalized mantissa is
always 1. This means we can use the bit position to hold the low order
bit of the exponent.

Same system for double, of course. Sign + 11 exponent bits + 53 mantissa
bits == 65. It fits, of course, in 64 bits.

--
Joe Wright
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
--- Albert Einstein ---

[CBFalconer]

Re: Does &quot;float&quo t; always occupy 32 bits

Malcolm wrote:

"Keith Thompson" <kst-u@mib.orgwrote in message
>

.... snip ...

>>
>It doesn't directly say anything, but I don't believe it's
>possible to meet the standard's requirements for type float in
>24 bits. By my calculations you need at least 27 bits (1 sign
>bit, 20 mantissa bits, 6 exponent bits).

>
Easy.Your 24 bits index into an array of double-precision 64 bit
values. Since the user isn't guaranteed more than 64 K of memory,
you've done it.

Harumph. C passes by value. How do you pass those beasts by value?

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home .att.net>