Re: [boost] Interest in an arbitrary precision library?

From: Joel Eidsath (jeidsath_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-06 21:03:21

>My point is that floating point representation of a number is in no way a peer
>concept of rational number. IOW your assertion :
>
>"Examples of basic rational number types in C++:  float, double, etc."
>  
>
Rational numbers are a mathematical concept, not a computer science 
concept.  Floats, doubles and so on hold rational numbers, not 
irrationals, not integers.

Now, are you seriously claiming, as the first poster did, that 
boost::rational will work whenever you need an arbitrary precision 
rational number?  Or do you have some other point?  I really fail to see 
what you are trying to get at.

The only point that you seemed to be trying to make with your examples 
was that "boost::rational has it's place too..."  Again, I fail to see 
what that has to do with the discussion at hand.  No one has said 
anything different.  (That place is just not an arbitrary precision 
library rational class.  For example, notice the calls to gcd() in the 
constructor.  You're toast as soon as you start dealing with large primes.)

Joel Eidsath