From: Schoenborn, Oliver (oliver.schoenborn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-21 15:14:43
> 2. I have read that a rational number class is being considered. I do
> not think there is any one 'best' way to represent rational numbers.
> One use of rational numbers is for exact computations. But
> arithimetic can quickly max out any fixed representation.
Isn't this true only if the representation is in the form n/m for n,m
belonging to [int_type_min,int_type_max]? But if you take out the
non-decimal part, ie. factor every number as k+n/m, then n/m is always
between 0 and 1, and the triplet (k,n,m) adequately represents rational
numbers over a very large range. If still insufficient, you could probably
factor it into a quadruplet (k,j,n,m) where all are ints and describe a
number of the form k.10^j +n/m.
Then again, maybe this is not at all what you meant by the above statement
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk