Re: [boost] [ratio] Assignation between equivalent ratios

Subject: Re: [boost] [ratio] Assignation between equivalent ratios
From: Christian Schladetsch (christian.schladetsch_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-07 07:47:38

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:44 PM, vicente.botet <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>wrote:

>
> do you think it is worth considering a ratio generator that will ensure a
> normalized ratio. In this way
>
> ratio_normalizer<1,3>::type will be the same as
> ratio_normalizer<3,9>::type. So no need to add the copy constructors and
> assignement operators.
>

This may seem petty, but is there a specific need or demonstrable pretext
for the use of Americanised 'z' over the traditional 's' in the term
'normalize'?

I know there is little chance for the English S to win here, resulting in *
normalise*, but I want to support the noble cause of supporting the European
English language (I am an Australian German).

What about both?

I can't think of where use of 'z' over 's' in a similar way grated on my
nerves in the STL or even the C lib. Is there an equivalent term that avoids
the issue entirely?

Christian