Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] [ratio] Mini-review of the proposed ratio library
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-30 21:03:41

> The review of Vicente Botet' Ratio library starts October 2nd and lasts
> until October 11th, 2010, unless an extension occurs.
> What is it?
> ========
> Portable implementation of the C++0x Standard Library's compile-time
> rational arithmetic working on C++03 and C++0x compilers. See the
> current C++0x working draft at
> - What is your evaluation of the design?

The question is essentially moot since Vicente followed the C++0x
standard library design. The real question is "Does Boost need a
library that every standard library vendor will be supplying anyhow?"

For me, the answer is, yes, at least provisionally. The provisional
part is because the library I'd really like to see in Boost in chrono.
But we can't have <boost/chrono.hpp> without <boost/ratio.hpp>, so I'm
in favor of ratio.

The reason I'd like a Boost version is that I don't want to have to
wait years and years to be able to use <boost/chrono.hpp> and
<boost/ratio.hpp> in Boost libraries. I want to be able to use them
with the compilers and standard libraries people are using today, not
years from now.

> - What is your evaluation of the implementation?

I am familiar with the original source code, and worked on boostifying
it. Vicente has done a lot of work to make the code more robust in the
Boost environment.

> - What is your evaluation of the documentation?

I skimmed through it, and checked the header against the C++ standard.
My impression is favorable.

> - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?

Chrono needs it:-)

> - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems?


> - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
> - reading? In-depth study?

A quick skim through the docs.

> - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

Some knowledge, but far from an expert.

> And finally, every review should answer this question:
> - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?


I'm hoping others will post more in depth reviews. My review is really
just a mini-review, but maybe will help to keep the ball rolling.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at