问题
I was reading Setting an int to Infinity in C++. I understand that when one needs true infinity, one is supposed to use numeric_limits<float>::infinity()
; I guess the rationale behind it is that usually integral types have no values designated for representing special states like NaN, Inf, etc. like IEEE 754 floats do (again C++ doesn't mandate neither - int
& float
used are left to the implementation); but still it's misleading that max > infinity
for a given type. I'm trying to understand the rationale behind this call in the standard. If having infinity
doesn't make sense for a type, then shouldn't it be disallowed instead of having a flag to be checked for its validity?
回答1:
The function numeric_limits<T>::infinity()
makes sense for those T
for which numeric_limits<T>::has_infinity
returns true
.
In case of T=int
, it returns false
. So that comparison doesn't make sense, because numeric_limits<int>::infinity()
does not return any meaningful value to compare with.
回答2:
If you read e.g. this reference you will see a table showing infinity to be zero for integer types. That's because integer types in C++ can't, by definition, be infinite.
回答3:
Suppose, conversely, the standard did reserve some value to represent inifity, and that numeric_limits<int>::infinity() > numeric_limits<int>::max()
. That means that there would be some value of int
which is greater than max()
, that is, some representable value of int
is greater than the greatest representable value of int.
Clearly, whichever way the Standard specifies, some natural understanding is violated. Either inifinity() <= max()
, or there exists x such that int(x) > max()
. The Standard must choose which rule of nature to violate.
I believe they chose wisely.
回答4:
numeric_limits<int>::infinity()
returns the representation of positive infinity, if available.
In case of integers, positive infinity does not exists:
cout << "int has infinity: " << numeric_limits<int>::has_infinity << endl;
prints
int has infinity: false
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13861629/why-is-numeric-limitsintmax-numeric-limitsintinfinity