Re: [boost] [MPL.Math] rational_part or fractional_part?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-31 11:51:30

Cromwell Enage <sponage_at_[hidden]> writes:

> --- Daryle Walker wrote:
>> Is BOOST_MPL_MATH_RATIONAL_PART_OF_RATIONAL a
>> re-statement of the rational number itself?
>
> No.
>
>> Or is it supposed to be the remainder after taking
>> out the "whole" part?
>
> Yes.
>
>> If the latter, then the name should have
> "FRACTIONAL"
>> replacing the first "RATIONAL", since "fractional"
>> and not "rational" better describes a left-over bit.
>
> For consistency this part of the macro name is
> lexically the same as the template name whose
> specialization the macro creates, i.e. rational_part.

Both names seems misleading to me.  What's wrong with 

  BOOST_MPL_MATH_RATIONAL_FRACTIONAL_PART
  fractional_part

??

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com