Subject: Re: [boost] [math] common_factor template parameters
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-06-28 04:31:17
>> I'd say they absolutely belong in Boost.Math or Boost.Integer rather than
>> Boost.MPL. Whether something is a compile-time facility or a run-time
>> should not determine what library it goes in; I'd wager most compile-time
>> facilities in boost are implemented in terms of MPL. The domain of MPL is
>> compile-time type sequences and algorithms on those sequences; the domain
>> the code in question seems to me to be more strongly related to
>> static_log2 and static_min_max than anything else
> My initial suggestion was not to move them to MPL but to make them
> conformant to MPL Integral Constant concept so they can be freely used in
> cunjunction with other numeric related meta-function form MPL.
That should happen too - but the suggestion was for traits that accept types
rather than values as arguments - what mpl::if_ is to mpl::if_c.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk