Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-31 00:03:58

Andras Erdei wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
>> Since rounding is a subset of unspecified, it can only be worse if it
>> carries an unacceptable overhead when overflow does not occur. I
>> don't think that this is the case here.
> yes!
>> Exception on overflow is only better than rounding if no result is
>> better than an approximate result, that is, when the answer has to be
>> correct no matter what. This requirement is better served by
>> rational<unlimited> which does deliver a correct answer. I don't see
>> how rational<limited>+exception-on-overflow is better.
> after i failed to convince people that the current boost::rational is
> useless, i agreed to make an exception throwing version in the secret
> hope that it can be made the default, and as in practice it will
> always throw and never give
> a result, it will discourage people from using it

> what really makes this scary is that there is the very same rational
> proposal before the committee, and if it makes through we will have a
> standard that cannot be made to work for fixed precision (builtins)
> and cannot be implemented efficiently for unlimited precision
> (bigints)
> sorry, but feeling frustrated :O)
> andras

Hi Andras,

I'm sorry you feel frustrated, but I don't think it's warranted. IIRC, when you
raised the issues before, after a bit of discussion I essentially said that I
didn't have time to consider the matter fully, and would get to it later. Now
we're having a fuller discussion of the issues you raised, there seem to be more
participants than before, and no final decisions have been made. I'd say things
are going well.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at