Lennart Augustsson lennart at augustsson.net
Sat Sep 30 04:19:50 EDT 2006

```Hang on, hang on, now I'm getting confused.

First you asked for the smallest (positive) x such that
1+x /= x
which is around x=4.5e15.
Then Joachim wondered if you wanted
1+x /= 1
which is around x=2.2e-16.
But not you claim to be looking for the smallest positive number that
a Double can represent.  Which is a totally different beast.  The
smallest possible Double depends on if you want to accept
denormalized numbers or not.  If you don't, then it's about x=4.5e-308.

Now what is the number you are looking for?

-- Lennart

On Sep 29, 2006, at 22:02 , Tamas K Papp wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 06:53:35PM -0700, Chad Scherrer wrote:
>
>> Tamas,
>>
>> You might want to read Joachim's post more carefully - he's trying to
>
>
> If his point is that there is no smallest positive number, then I
> think I understand it, thanks.  I should have said that I was looking
> for the smallest positive number Double can represent, but thought
> that was clear from the context.
>
> If this is not his point, I'd really appreciate an explanation.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tamas
> _______________________________________________