
Boost : 
From: Moore, Paul (Paul.Moore_at_[hidden])
Date: 19991209 06:58:51
It struck me that my rational number class could do with a std::abs()
implementation. What is the accepted way to do this? Should I do
namespace boost {
template <typename Int> class rational<Int> {
}
template typename<Int> inline rational<Int> abs(rational<Int> r);
}
or should I put my abs() into namespace std, using
namespace boost {
template <typename Int> class rational<Int> {
}
}
namespace std {
template typename<Int> inline boost::rational<Int>
abs(boost::rational<Int> r);
}
I sort of lean towards the latter, as code like
using std::abs;
using boost::rational;
int n = 1;
rational<int> r(1);
n = abs(n);
r = abs(r);
seems natural to me. Requiring an additional "using boost::abs" seems
unintuitive. But I'm not sure if it is legitimate to add overloads in the
std:: namespace like this... I couldn't find any examples of things like
this which I could learn from (std::swap specialisations seem to be
implemented as member functions).
Does anyone have any suggestions?
Thanks,
Paul.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk