Re: [PATCH v3 10/19] qlit: Support all types of QNums

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 24/11/20 10:55, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > +        /* Larger than UINT64_MAX: */
> > +        QLIT_QNUM_DOUBLE(18446744073709552e3),
> > +        /* Smaller than INT64_MIN: */
> > +        QLIT_QNUM_DOUBLE(-92233720368547758e2),
> Why "larger than UINT64_MAX" and "smaller than INT64_MIN"?

I guess the point is to test values that are only representable as a 
double, so (double)((uint64_t)INT64_MAX+1) wouldn't be very useful for 
that: as the expression shows, it would not be a QNUM_VAL_INT but it 
would be representable as QNUM_VAL_UINT.

So these are the cases that matter the most, even though -1, 0 and 
INT64_MAX+1 could be nice to have.

Paolo