Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8839445
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 14, 20262026-06-14T10:14:20+00:00 2026-06-14T10:14:20+00:00

Is it safe to assume that the condition (int)(i * 1.0f) == i is

  • 0

Is it safe to assume that the condition (int)(i * 1.0f) == i is true for any integer i?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-14T10:14:21+00:00Added an answer on June 14, 2026 at 10:14 am

    No.

    If i is sufficiently large that int(float(i)) != i (assuming float is IEEE-754 single precision, i = 0x1000001 suffices to exhibit this) then this is false, because multiplication by 1.0f forces a conversion to float, which changes the value even though the subsequent multiplication does not.

    However, if i is a 32-bit integer and double is IEEE-754 double, then it is true that int(i*1.0) == i.


    Just to be totally clear, multiplication by 1.0f is exact. It’s the conversion from int to float that may not be.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Is it safe to assume that java.util.concurrent.CompletionService.take().isDone() will always return true? If so, why
std::map<int,int> mapy; ++mapy[5]; Is it safe to assume that mapy[5] will always be 1?
Is it safe to assume that $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR'] always returns a IPv4 address ? Thanks!
It is safe to assume that working with or passing around an immutable object
Is it safe to assume that WPF TwoWay data binding Wont work on controls
Is it safe to assume that when a user requests an .aspx page via
Is it safe to assume that the loopback network adapter on a Linux system
Related: Is it safe to assume an int will always be 32 bits in
Am I safe to assume that the offset of a data member ( offsetof(mystruct,
Is it safe to assume that: because scala.AnyRef defines toString() and hashCode() with a

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.