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

From: Gabriel Dos Reis (gdr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-08 02:46:43

jhr.walter_at_[hidden] (Joerg Walter) writes:

| > Well, happy or not one has to cope with one thing or the other.
| > A complaint I regularly see reported on the GCC list is GCC's
| > inconsistent use of mixed precision on x86 plateforms.
| 
| But wouldn't help an implementation like
| 
| template<class T1, class T2>
| typename promote_traits<T1, T2>::result_type operator+(const T1 &t1, const
| T2 &t2) {
|   typedef  typename promote_traits<T1, T2>::result_type  result_type;
|   return result_type (t1) + result_type (t2);
| }
| 
| to prevent such complaints then?

No.  Sure the computation is done in a wider precision, but there is no
control on the *actual* destination type.

-- Gaby