Re: [boost] [mpl::math Rational] type member

From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-23 10:22:34

"David Abrahams"  wrote
> "Andy Little" writes:

> I don't see what the presence of numerator and denominator has to do
> with normalization.

They should be typedefs for  the input parameters?

[cut]

>>> Is it daft to want my_rational<x,1> to be a conforming MPL integral
>>> constant?
>>
>> Who wants special cases?
>
> Who suggested a special case?

Whoever said , " Is it daft to want my_rational<x,1> to be a conforming MPL
integral constant?" .

>> integral constant can be converted to a
>> rational constant, but not necessarily the other way.
>
> Don't forget that the types are all known at compile-time.  The usual
> runtime logic doesn't necessarily apply.  A conversion from
> my_rational<x,1> to int_<x> is not a narrowing conversion.

Conversion is fine. Thats not what you said above. Actually I already use
conversions in my boosted version of my pqs library, so that user can  use
integer rather than rational dimensions. It works fine.

cheers
Andy Little