In school you deal with real numbers. Real in the mathematical sense: ℝ. In programming we don't have that. We have integers and floating point. Maybe we have an arbitrary precision data type but that is out of scope here.

Since all people are used to real numbers, programmers can forget that programs use other numbers. It results in bugs because cases are forgotten. This text is interactive and contains short tests. Maybe it reveals that you were not even aware of some cases.

## Integer addition

We start with a scenario where all variables are int and we add two positive numbers.

void foo(int x, int y) { if (x <= 0 || y <= 0) return; int z = x + y;

Assume you evaluate the following expressions afterwards.
Select all which **can be true!**

z > x

z < x

z == x

z != x

If you did not already know, you are now aware about overflows. The range of numbers is limited for integers to something like 32bit or 64bit. So if you try to compute a larger number the CPU cannot represented it and the number overflows into something different.

How can you detect or avoid overflows?
The first idea is "if the result is negative...".
Avoid that!
If the operation has happened,
you already had
undefined behavior.
How do you check before the operation?
The good check is `if (x > MAX_INT - y)`.
This is not done by default
because it comes with a serious performance hit.
Instead of a single add instruction,
the CPU does checking and branching.
GCC and Clang come with
builtins for overflow checking.

Let's try again with overflow check:

void foo(int x, int y) { if (x <= 0 || y <= 0) return; if (x > INT_MAX - y) return; // overflow int z = x + y;

Assume you evaluate the following expressions afterwards.
Select all which **can be true!**

z > x

z < x

z == x

z != x

(Technically, the case `z==x` is possible in case the CPU uses
saturating arithmetic.
This is useful for digital signal processors
but so rare that I ignored it in the test.)

There are also "underflows" since there is boundary in the other direction as well. You can handle these in the same way.

## Floating point addition

As an alternative to integers, programmers can use IEEE 754 floating point number. Of course, you keep overflows in mind now but do you know how they show up?

void foo(double x, double y) { if (x <= 0.0 || y <= 0.0) return; double z = x + y;

Assume you evaluate the following expressions afterwards.
Select all which **can be true!**

z > x

z < x

z == x

z != x

At this point you know that floating point operations may or may not trap depending on mode. In C99, feenableexcept lets you change the behavior.

Now let us invert the question and ask for "false". Just by asking the question, you probably suspect that the answer is just the previous ones inverted. So be careful. The trap option is missing because we already know that traps are possible.

void foo(double x, double y) { if (x <= 0.0 || y <= 0.0) return; double z = x + y;

Assume you evaluate the following expressions afterwards.
Select all which **can be false!**

z > x

z < x

z == x

z != x

Not a Number (NaN) is something you need to be aware of
when dealing with floating point.
Any comparison with NaN is false,
so the answers above are trivial.
This includes `x == x`
which makes it the trick to check for NaN.
Let us use it.

void foo(double x, double y) { if (x <= 0.0 || y <= 0.0) return; if (! (x == x && y == y)) return; double z = x + y;

Assume you evaluate the following expressions afterwards.
Select all which **can be false!**

z > x

z < x

z == x

z != x

This concludes the pitfalls with addition. It leaves the other operations subtraction, multiplication, division, modulo. We are not going to consider them as because it is the same drill. Only special topics remain for here.

## Division by Zero

Everybody knows division by zero is not allowed. For integers you can assume a trap happens but floats have additional options. So what happens if we try to?

void foo(double x, double y) { double z = x / y;

Assume y is zero. Select all **true statements!**

Always traps.

Never traps.

z is NaN assuming no trap.

z is not negative assuming no trap and x positive.

z is not NaN assuming no trap and x not NaN.

Division by zero is undefined for real numbers and integers but IEEE 754 defines something. The question about good defaults remains. Are mistakes too easy such that we should enable exceptions by default? Are infinity and NaN values like the others or are they more dangerous than 42E10 for example?

## Equality Checks

People often advise you to not check floating point values for equality. Try it:

bool equalsDotThree(double x) { return x == 0.3; }

Select all expressions which evaluate to **true**
when used as parameter for equalsDotThree.

0.3

0.3f

0.9 / 0.3

0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1

0.3 - 0.1 + 0.1

0.3 + 0.1 - 0.1

You have to consider the precision when checking for equality.
So instead of `x == y` you test for `abs(x-y) < epsilon`.
The value of epsilon depends on the context.
There are probably utility libraries around which provide
a `bool isZero(double x)` function which has a hardcoded epsilon inside.
Do not try this at home!
Sometimes epsilon should be 0.1 and sometimes rather 1E-10.
This cannot be decided generically.

This article does not intend to teach everything about integer and floating point arithmetic. Try this paper instead. Here, I only try to make you respect the fact that the numbers are not real (unless you answered everything correctly).

Thanks Manfred, Artjom and Christoph for valuable feedback.

©