From: Joel Eidsath (jeidsath_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-07 08:18:09
Andy Little wrote:
>It is your useage of the word "rational number" that I am arguing with. Its
>misleading because ( I think) you are using it to mean an arbitrary precision
>floating point number representation of a real value rather than its proper
>sense. see e.g:
No, I was precise in my language. To be very clear: all arbitrary
precision floating point numbers are rational, though not all rational
numbers can be represented (exactly) as arbitrary precision floating
points. That's all I ever meant, and all I ever used it to mean.
>Perhaps an alternative name to 'rational' for your type would be less confusing.
Okay, so this whole thing was just a naming issue? You have nothing to
say about how I should code things? Sure, no problem. I was following
Stroup's NTL who names his classes "ZZ" (Z stands for the integers in
mathematics) and "RR" (R stands for the reals) respectively. All I'm
working on right now is implementation. Suggest a name, and I'll note it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk