Re: [boost] [MPL.Math] ratio

Subject: Re: [boost] [MPL.Math] ratio
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-13 12:43:27

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Cromwell Enage <sponage_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hi, all!  Sorry I've been out for so long.
>
> I've been reading N2691 for the past couple of days.

The latest WP is N2798. See
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf

>  I just noticed section 20.3, called "compile-time rational arithmetic", and I'm wondering how stable that specification is.

20.3 in N2798 is very stable, since except for the diff markup it is
the same as the Committee Draft that is currently being reviewed by
national bodies, and there are no outstanding issues in the LWG active
issues list.

>  I'm also wondering whether or not anyone else has been working on an implementation.

See the <boost/ratio.hpp> header that is part of the Chrono library
added to the sandbox yesterday.

Checkout http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/chrono with Subversion.

>  A Google search turned up a "Summer of Code" project labeled 'ontl', but the ratio source code is not part of the download or its SVN distribution.
>
> In the meantime, my questions are:
> * Should I resume work on MPL.Math?  Should I make a different branch, still part of MPL?  Or should I fork a separate Boost project altogether?
> * If I resume work, should I make the implementation more standards-conformant?

Sorry, I'm not familiar with the MPL.Math work you are referring to.
Perhaps look at the Chrono <boost/ratio.hpp> header and see if it
affects your thinking.

--Beman