Re: [boost] [math] common_factor template parameters

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 
>> facility
>> 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 
>> of
>> the code in question seems to me to be more strongly related to 
>> Boost.Integer's
>> 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.

John.