Why is -(Double.MAX_VALUE) smaller than Double.MIN_VALUE?

Question

public class test {
    public static void main(String[] args) {

        double num = -Double.MAX_VALUE;
        double num1 = Double.MIN_VALUE;

        if (num < num1)
            System.out.println("num");
        else
            System.out.println("num1");
        
    }
}

I wrote this code to check which one is smaller and it return num, I was wondering why is it like that with double but not with integers?

`Double.MAX_VALUE` is a very large positive number. `Double.MIN_VALUE` is a very small positive number, not a very large negative number. — khelwood, Oct 14 '21 at 12:21
To be precise [`Double.MIN_VALUE`](https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/17/docs/api/java.base/java/lang/Double.html#MIN_VALUE) represents "the smallest positive nonzero value of type double" — Federico klez Culloca, Oct 14 '21 at 12:23
then why is it not the same in integers, -Integer.MAX_VALUE equals Integer.MIN_VALUE — Galz, Oct 14 '21 at 12:23
@Galz *"-Integer.MAX_VALUE equals Integer.MIN_VALUE"* it doesn't. `(-Integer.MAX_VALUE) == Integer.MIN_VALUE` returns false on my machine. — Federico klez Culloca, Oct 14 '21 at 12:29
`-Integer.MIN_VALUE == Integer.MIN_VALUE`, however. `-Integer.MAX_VALUE == Integer.MIN_VALUE + 1`. — Andy Turner, Oct 14 '21 at 12:30
@Galz EPSILON is the name of the constant for the smallest double value in .NET. I believe this is just a bad naming decision on part of Java, you will find a lot of them and they are still in the language for backwards compatibility purposes. — corlaez, Oct 14 '21 at 12:30

khelwood · Accepted Answer · 2021-10-14T12:30:05.100

See https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/lang/Double.html

Double.MAX_VALUE is the biggest finite number that double can hold. (A very large positive number.)

Double.MIN_VALUE is the smallest positive number that double can hold. (A very small positive number.)

So -Double.MAX_VALUE is a very large negative number. That's a lower number than a very small positive number.

Contrarily, Integer.MIN_VALUE is the most negative number that an int can hold. It has a different meaning from the similarly named constant in Double.

score 1 · Answer 2 · answered Oct 14 '21 at 12:24

As stated in the Javadoc of Double:

MAX_VALUE is "A constant holding the largest positive finite value of type double, (2-2^-52)·2¹⁰²³.", that is, a large positive number.
MIN_VALUE is "A constant holding the smallest positive nonzero value of type double, 2^-1074.", that is, a small positive number.

So, -MAX_VALUE is a large negative number, which is less that zero, which is less than a small positive number.small positive number.

Why is -(Double.MAX_VALUE) smaller than Double.MIN_VALUE?

2 Answers2