Re: [boost] Infinite precision integer draft

From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-25 05:27:23

|  -----Original Message-----
|  From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
|  [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Maarten 
|  Kronenburg
|  Sent: 24 May 2006 18:29
|  To: boost_at_[hidden]
|  Subject: [boost] Infinite precision integer draft
|  
|  In the boost vault
|  http://boost-consulting.com/vault/
|  under Math - Numerics the document
|  infintdraft.pdf contains the
|  Proposal for an Infinite Precision Integer
|  for Library Technical Report 2, Draft.
|  Any comments are welcome.

1  I wonder if the get_sign could not be sign_bit to comform to
floating-point types.  I know that one could maintain there isn't a sign bit
(it's a byte or more).

2  If you have to write is_zero() instead of == 0,  will this make templated
code difficult? 

3  Is there a reason for starting with integer rather than unsigned integer
(which sounds simpler). Will deriving unsigned integer from (signed) integer
be less efficient that vice versa?

4

2.3.1 Rationale

The destructor is virtual so that derivation of class integer is possible.

Should 'of' be 'from'?

5  Is there a reason why 

const integer x( "0x12345678901ABCDEF" ); is not implemented?

when istream hex input is?

6  You might like to reference other widely used implementations like NTL?

But this is long, long overdue as a Boost and Standard Library.

Good luck!

Paul

---
Paul A Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB
[phone] & SMS, Mobile [phone] & SMS
pbristow_at_[hidden]