2 ms·

That has more to do with decimal <-> binary conversion than arithmetic/comparison. Using hex literals makes it clearer 0x1.999999999999ap-4 ("0.1") +

• jacquesm 7mo ago
  Absolutely nobody will think this is 'clearer', this is a leaky abstraction and personally I think that the OP is right and == in combination with floating point constants should be limited to '0' and that's it.
  • pdpi 7mo ago
    We all know that 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1, but 0.33 + 0.33 + 0.33 = 0.99. We're sufficiently used to decimal to know that 1/3 doesn't have a finite decimal representation. Decimal 1/10 doesn't have a finite binary representation, for the exact same reason that 1/3 doesn't have one in decimal — 3 is co-prime with 10, and 5 is co-prime with 2. The only leaky abstraction here is our bias towards decimal. (Fun fact: "base 10" is meaningless, because every base calls itself base 10)
    • 1718627440 7mo ago
      > Fun fact: "base 10" is meaningless, because every base calls itself base 10 Maybe we should name the bases by the largest digit they have, so that we are using base 9 most of the time.
• brandmeyer 7mo ago
  Repeating the exercise with something that is exactly representable in floating point like 1/8 instead of 1/10 highlights the difference.