Re: [boost] Formal Review for Interval Library (was: Interval Library reminder)

From: Herve Bronnimann (hbr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-07 13:16:40

On Sat, Sep 07, 2002 at 07:29:00PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | Note that for intervals, it was a question at some point whether we
> | should provide specializations for T==float, double and long double,
> | with additional implicit conversions for float->double->long double.
> | For those ones, we can guarantee at least that there is no loss of
> | precision.
> 
> This is what is done in the standard for std::complex<>, and in effect
> you end up rewritten the same thing over and over...

Yes that was also one worry. Although we tried to keep the class
template interval at its smallest, all of its members have to be
redefined for each specialization. And luckily, interval<T> does not
have as big an interface as complex<T>, but even then...
-- 
Herve'