Re: [boost] New Boost.XInt Library, request preliminary review

Subject: Re: [boost] New Boost.XInt Library, request preliminary review
From: Chad Nelson (chad.thecomfychair_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-26 18:37:16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> I'd leave doing work on docs and testing until you get more positive
> feedback.
> 
> Doxygen can work well (especially when used with Quickbook, but needs
> to have useful comments in the C++ code to be more than a list of
> classes, functions...). (I used to think Doxygen was used as an
> excuse not to write docs ;-)

That was the impression that I've gotten about it too. The docs that
I've seen written with it are close to useless, not much better than
simply reading the source code. I try to make my documentation more
useful than that.

>> I did put an example in, in the documentation -- the Fibonacci
>> example.
> 
> Sorry I didn't spot these - I expected to find in an /examples
> subfolder.

As I said, I can put it there too, if it would be useful. I usually go
to the documentation first, and figured most other people would too. For
larger examples, I'd definitely put them there, and just provide a link
in the docs.

> [...] is not encouraging, for reasons unclear.
> 
> http://www.linux2you.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2008/n2598.html
> 
> gives the status of the above along with N1744 Michiel Slaters on
> which yours is based as "open" rather than rejected.
> 
> But should not necessarily deter you :-)
> 
> A working Boost library in widespread use might change things?

It would also keep programmers that prefer to use C++ from being forced
to Python or another language, just for the large integer support. :-)

> (But the ghost of GMP's GPL licence haunts Big Integer proposals.  As
> I've said elsewhere, a really good solution must be switchable to use
> GMP, if your license requirements permit).

I can see the desirability of that. But that said, it shouldn't be all
that difficult to write a wrapper for pretty much any external library,
to adapt it to whatever interface xint ends up using. I'm aiming for a
Boost-licensed native C++ implementation for now, as that seems to be
what has been missing to date.

> PS Would you collaborate with a GSoC student to do the Boost-style
> docs and tests, and more examples?

I'm willing, though I don't really think there's enough work for more
than one person.

>>> PS  I note it doesn't (yet) specialise std::numeric_limits?
>>
>> I've put it on the to-do list.
> 
> I think NaN *is* meaningful for your integer type. However this is a
> minor detail that can added later.

I agree, and I'll add it to the numeric_limits definition.
- -- 
Chad Nelson
Oak Circle Software, Inc.
*
*
*
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkutNxwACgkQp9x9jeZ9/wRMOgCaA64AYS0/oByVjSOL3yPMUwp4
Y7wAniY5prMF2niuvnF9Zn1ZW1EqibMM
=DbTR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----