3 ms·
Smaller is an ambiguous term when it comes to numbers. Is it the lesser value? Or is it the value nearest to 0? It depends on the context. Either way, they cov
by squeaky-clean 9y ago
Smaller is an ambiguous term when it comes to numbers. Is it the lesser value? Or is it the value nearest to 0? It depends on the context.
Either way, they cover the sign bit, and the brackets on the diagram show the graphs are not using the sign, just exponent and mantissa. So I'd assume the same principles stand but for 0 to -1, -1- to -2, and so on.
- Michielvv 9y agoI mean smaller as in closer to zero as in exponent lower than 127. That part is obvious in the formula, but not from the graphs. The interesting part of the explanation is that it shows very clearly the effect of the 1.M in the formula. Unfortunately it then does not answer the resulting question: how is zero represented. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signed_zero https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signed_zero does a pretty good job at that though)