I have seen posts about

0.0 == -0.0

but I wasn’t expecting to see that in a multiplication 🤔

that's how floats work 😄

@Marko Mitic I think you mean that's how floats don't work :troll:

float has a dedicated sign bit, so -0 is a valid option

the first bit of each float denotes plus/minus. Therefore float have both

0.0

and

-0.0

but they are equal.

ints only have one 0, but

-Int.MIN_VALUE == Int.MIN_VALUE

Yes, I know, though that doesn't mean much. Look how many different representations there are for

NaN

. They could have just added that one to the list.

edge cases are overflow-related, there isn't a correct way to handle those so I can't take that as a negative

Fair point 🙂

It's great how Float.NaN != Float.NaN

😆

I guess sign of your 0.0 is another thing you cant choose lol

You could do it on the raw bits

-0.0 is an IEEE standard btw.

Yes, I’m aware of that. This isn’t the first time I saw -0.0. But in the articles I saw in the past they mostly talked about its existence and what it returns when compared to positive zero. I wasn’t expecting to see it as a result of simple multiplication like this. I did a quick research and I couldn’t find any posts related to this. I’ve seen posts about why one should use BigDecimal over double, and how it doesn’t handle precision well, but nothing related to this. And I think this is important, or I am missing something