Re: [boost] Infinite precision integer draft

From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-25 13:55:07

|  -----Original Message-----
|  From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
|  [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Maarten 
|  Kronenburg
|  Sent: 25 May 2006 15:38
|  To: boost_at_[hidden]
|  Subject: Re: [boost] Infinite precision integer draft
|  
|  
|  > 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).
|  
|  I like the name get_sign more, just like for example get_time.

agree, but ...

|  Where did you find sign_bit?

C99 incorporation into C++ TR1 added signbit - but (intended?) only for
floating-point perhaps?.
  
|  > 2  If you have to write is_zero() instead of == 0,  will this make
|  templated code difficult?
|  
|  The == 0 notation is always allowed, also in templates,
|  but it is a little slower than is_zero().
|  The == 0 generates a temporary integer with value zero,
|  by implicit converting constructor.
|  But in templates that also should work for template type
|  parameter int, the == 0 indeed must be used.

Fine.
  
|  > 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?
|  
|  The unsigned integer is not simpler but
|  more difficult than the integer, 

I'm sure you are right.

|  > 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]