The smallest and largest values of numeric types

[Hendrik van Rooyen]

 "Michael Hoffman" <cam.ac.uk at mh391.invalid> wrote:

>
20859248300531693115643211913059311997417115606882000504639505780471641693377296
50765802242049L
>
> Of course performance decreases for longer longs.

I once made a thing that tried to find the limit of longs and stopped
when I had two or three screenfulls of numbers.

I came to the conclusion that for "integer" arithmetic like this,
the limit is either your memory size, or some other number
that is so big that in practice you don't have to worry about it..

- Hendrik