Re: [boost] is_nan

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-26 04:56:03

AlisdairM wrote:
> John Maddock wrote:
> 
>> Oh, actually I need generic versions of these functions in order to
>> make parts of the math toolkit I'm working on generic: at the very
>> least these scale to pretty much anything that has numeric_limits
>> defined, without that all you can do is assume the number is a zero
>> or a normal: but that's OK too because most (all?) extended precision
>> types like NTL::RR don't support infinities or NaN's anyway.
> 
> Sounds like another good test candidate for C++0x Concepts ;?)

Yes please :-)

In fact they would work very well in situations like this.

John.