Re: [boost] is_nan

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-25 20:47:50

John Maddock wrote:
> Johan Råde wrote:
>> So it would make sense to have the functions
>>
>>    is_finite()
>>    is_normal()
>>    is_subnormal()
>>
>>    is_infinity()
>>    is_plus_infinity()
>>    is_minus_infinity()
>>
>>    is_nan()
> 
> Do we really want to use gratuitously different names from those in C99:
> 
> isfinite
> isnorm
> isinf
> isnan

Yes ! Once again there is no reason to let the "C" language determine 
how things are done in "C++". The names suggested by Johan Rade are much 
more easily rememberable than the "C" names above.