On Sat, Dec 7, 2024 at 1:54 PM Halalaluyafail3 via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> C23 standardized the functions nextup and nextdown which take a single
> argument, are these what you're looking for?
>

Yes!

That sounds like exactly what I had in mind.

Chip



>
> On Sat, Dec 7, 2024 at 10:24 AM Charles R Hogg via Std-Proposals
> <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > `std::nextafter` and friends provide the next representable value after
> the first argument, in the direction of the second argument.
> >
> > Often, I find myself wanting specifically the next-higher or next-lower
> representable value. In these cases, it feels awkward to cook up a number
> that I know will be higher or lower. Yes, I can use
> `std::numeric_limits`. I think `max` and `lowest` are the right tools for
> the job. `infinity` is tempting, but I don't see a "negative infinity", I
> don't want to raise questions in the reader's mind about negating singular
> values like this, and `infinity` would be a disastrous choice for integral
> types, where it returns `0`. (Not that we typically intentionally use
> `nextafter` for integral types, but it may happen in a generic template by
> accident.)
> >
> > Sometimes I wonder: wouldn't it be more intent-based to provide
> something like `std::next_higher()` and `std::next_lower()`, with a single
> argument? Has this ever been proposed?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chip
> > --
> > Std-Proposals mailing list
> > Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> > https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>